Cart

  • SUGGESTED TOPICS
  • The Magazine
  • Newsletters
  • Managing Yourself
  • Managing Teams
  • Work-life Balance
  • The Big Idea
  • Data & Visuals
  • Reading Lists
  • Case Selections
  • HBR Learning
  • Topic Feeds
  • Account Settings
  • Email Preferences

How Bullying Manifests at Work — and How to Stop It

  • Ludmila N. Praslova,
  • Ron Carucci,
  • Caroline Stokes

research on bullying in the workplace

It’s a systemic problem that requires systemic solutions.

The term workplace bullying describes a wide range of behaviors, and this complexity makes addressing it difficult and often ineffective. For example, most anti-bullying advice, from “anger management” to zero-tolerance policies, deals with more overt forms of bullying. Covert bullying, such as withholding information or gaslighting, is rarely considered or addressed. In this piece, the authors discuss the different types of bullying, the myths that prevent leaders from addressing it, and how organizations can effectively intervene and create a safer workplace.

While the organizational costs of incivility and toxicity are well documented, bullying at work is still a problem. An estimated 48.6 million Americans, or about 30% of the workforce, are bullied at work. In India, that percentage is reported to be as high as 46% or even 55% . In Germany, it’s a lower but non-negligible 17% . Yet bullying often receives little attention or effective action.

research on bullying in the workplace

  • LP Ludmila N. Praslova , PhD, SHRM-SCP , author of the The Canary Code , uses her extensive experience with neurodiversity and global and cultural inclusion to help create talent-rich workplaces. She is a professor of graduate industrial-organizational psychology and the accreditation liaison officer at Vanguard University of Southern California.
  • Ron Carucci is co-founder and managing partner at  Navalent , working with CEOs and executives pursuing transformational change. He is the bestselling author of eight books, including To Be Honest and Rising to Power . Connect with him on Linked In at  RonCarucci , and download his free “How Honest is My Team?” assessment.
  • CS Caroline Stokes specializes in business sustainability, people strategy, and executive leadership development. Connect with her on LinkedIn at oCarolineStokes and use her Workplace EQ tool  to design a sustainable organization to tackle societal, economic, and environmental change. Caroline is the author of Elephants Before Unicorns: Emotionally Intelligent HR Strategies to Save Your Company .

Partner Center

research on bullying in the workplace

What To Do When the Boss is a Bully?

Leaders who view themselves as less competent are much more likely to act out aggressively towards their subordinates.

APS

Research Topic: Workplace Bullying

Powerful people who engaged in abusive behavior directed at employees paid the price later with lowered well-being.

research on bullying in the workplace

Mean Bosses Make Themselves Miserable, Too

Victims of workplace bullying often become stressed and anxious, making them easy targets for additional abuse.

research on bullying in the workplace

The Vicious Cycle of Workplace Bullying

New evidence suggests that thinking about money may help buffer against the emotional toll of ostracism and social exclusion at work.

research on bullying in the workplace

Can Cash Counter Workplace Ostracism?

While low performers are typically the targets of bullying from co-workers, research suggests that people tagged as aces are also victimized in more discrete ways.

research on bullying in the workplace

Both Stars and Blunderers Get Bullied at Work

Supervisors often resort to bullying to compensate for their own feelings of incompetence. But studies show that bosses lower their aggression when they feel appreciated.

research on bullying in the workplace

A Simple ‘Thanks’ Can Tame the Barking Boss

A new study links workplace bullying to negative health outcomes for employees, including increases in long-term sick leave and prescriptions for antidepressants.

research on bullying in the workplace

Workplace Bullying May Be Linked to Long-Term Health Issues

Learn what researchers have discovered about the factors that lead to bullying and the long-term consequences it can have.

This is a photo of a teen sitting alone on a set of stairs.

Privacy Overview

woman with hand on knob of door marked manager, man in room gestures angrily

About a third of employees have faced bullying at work – here’s how to recognize and deal with it

research on bullying in the workplace

Program Director & Associate Professor of Industrial-Organizational and Applied Psychology, Adler University

research on bullying in the workplace

Assistant Professor of Social Work, University of Nebraska Omaha

Disclosure statement

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Nebraska Omaha and Adler University provide funding as members of The Conversation US.

Adler University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA.

Adler University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA-FR.

View all partners

The phenomenon of bullying, harassment and sexual abuse in workplaces throughout North America is widespread and harmful to both individuals and organizations. In fact, bullying at work affects up to 30% of workers over time .

As practitioners and researchers who study workplace violence, including bullying, harassment and sexual abuse, we define workplace bullying as harmful acts of mistreatment between people that go beyond incivility and cross the line to intentionally causing harm.

Bullying behaviors range from verbally insulting or socially excluding someone to sabotaging the victim’s work, inflicting psychological terror and engaging in sexual abuse or physical aggression. Manipulation and provocation also play a role in bullying dynamics, and cyberbullying has emerged as a new form of workplace harassment. Research suggests the impacts of workplace bullying affect employee health and safety and the workplace overall .

In a grocery store line, if someone invades your space, shoves you aside or threatens physical harm, the police may intervene, potentially resulting in an arrest. However, in the workplace, incidents involving bullying, assault, sexual abuse or other forms of violence are typically addressed through internal investigations. Our research suggests that treating workplace bullying as a matter of public health rather than employment law is necessary to protect those being targeted.

man in reflective vest sits on pallet with boxes with his head leaning on his hand

Workplace bullying results in real harms

Targets of workplace bullying often experience serious repercussions , including stress and burnout, along with other diagnosed mental health issues and, in extreme cases, suicide.

Bullying can affect physical health , with symptoms including sleep disturbances, cardiovascular diseases, body aches and pain, loss of appetite and headaches. Targets often describe an inability to concentrate ; since they’re spending time worrying about what is going to happen to them next, job performance suffers. The negative impacts can spill over to a target’s personal life and affect their relationships with family and friends.

It’s not unusual for targeted workers to feel uncomfortable coming forward and talking about their experiences. But suffering in silence can lead to an even more toxic climate at work that can undermine your victims’ sense of security, with long-term consequences for their well-being.

Personality traits of bullies and their targets

Workplace bullies often target those who possess qualities highly valued by employers : self-sufficiency, cautiousness and innovativeness. Those targeted typically are motivated, have a kind perspective and prefer to avoid getting involved in office politics or engaging in competitive behavior. They take charge of their work and responsibilities.

Bullying often involves an imbalance of power , where the perpetrator acts to obtain power and control over the target.

Researchers find that bullies tend to have low self-esteem, problems with anger management and even personality disorders. Bullies often target people based on their appearance, behavior, race, religion, educational background, LGBTQ+ identity or because of perceived threats to their own career.

There’s no hard-and-fast profile, but males tend to exhibit more of the traits associated with bullying. Those who possess tendencies toward what psychologists call dark triad traits – Machiavellianism , subclinical psychopathy and subclinical narcissism – often gravitate toward jobs that offer high levels of freedom and hierarchical structures.

Are you being bullied?

Have you noticed a decline in your emotional or physical health ? Is your job performance being affected? Feeling constantly stressed, anxious or demoralized are signs that something isn’t right.

Think about whether you feel singled out. Do you sense that you’re being isolated because of how others treat you?

If you do conclude you’re being bullied, your first priority is keeping yourself safe . Defending yourself against workplace bullying takes courage, but there are steps you can take to diffuse, distance and document what is happening to you.

In the moment when bullying is occurring, focus on trying to keep your emotions in check and avoid being reactive. For example, try to gain some psychological distance in an emotionally charged situation – politely walk away, don’t engage, give yourself time to settle your emotions. Taking space by stepping away can disrupt the immediate intensity of the situation. It helps you stay in control rather than allowing a bully to force you to respond impulsively in the moment, which can lead you to say or do something you’ll regret.

Try your best to de-escalate the situation. Some tips for how to stop an interaction from spiraling include:

  • Using polite, firm language to ask the bully to stop the conversation.
  • Asking the bully to leave.
  • Removing yourself from the situation if the bully won’t go.
  • Informing your supervisor immediately.

If you feel threatened, calmly and politely stop the interaction by removing yourself in a nonthreatening way . As challenging as it can be, the key here is to stay composed and remain respectful.

worker in foreground aware of two in background of warehouse scene, watching

How to respond to an ongoing situation

It may be helpful to engage in some advanced planning with a friend or colleague. Rehearse a bullying situation and practice how you would respond to help you get comfortable using emotional distancing and de-escalation . Advance practice can help you handle an emotionally charged encounter.

Seek the support and safety of your peers . They can talk things through with you and become your allies if they are asked to describe or even testify about a bullying incident they witnessed.

Strive for an attitude of strength and confidence in yourself. Workplace bullies often choose to attack people they peg as easy targets. Present a strong front, trust in yourself and have confidence in your work – these attributes may make you less likely to be targeted .

Document your experiences when you perceive there is a problem. Be objective: Note the time and date, what happened, who was present, what was said and how it made you feel. Keeping a record helps quantify what is happening. Your organization should have policies and procedures to support you if you believe you are being bullied at work.

A caveat, though: Keep in mind, human resources departments are often ill-equipped to manage these issues, and complaints may be mishandled , improperly dismissed or simply ignored. Sometimes, if you’re able, it is better to look for a new job.

In order to effectively tackle the problem of workplace bullying and harassment, it is important for both employees and organizations to acknowledge and actively address these concerns. By establishing policies against bullying and fostering open lines of communication, workplaces can create safer spaces that enhance the well-being and productivity of their employees.

  • Workplace bullying
  • Workplace violence
  • Harassment at work

research on bullying in the workplace

General Manager | La Trobe University, Sydney Campus

research on bullying in the workplace

Administrative Officer

research on bullying in the workplace

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Business Law & Taxation

research on bullying in the workplace

Newsletters and Social Media Manager

research on bullying in the workplace

Industrial Officer (Senior)

  • Bipolar Disorder
  • Therapy Center
  • When To See a Therapist
  • Types of Therapy
  • Best Online Therapy
  • Best Couples Therapy
  • Best Family Therapy
  • Managing Stress
  • Sleep and Dreaming
  • Understanding Emotions
  • Self-Improvement
  • Healthy Relationships
  • Student Resources
  • Personality Types
  • Verywell Mind Insights
  • 2023 Verywell Mind 25
  • Mental Health in the Classroom
  • Editorial Process
  • Meet Our Review Board
  • Crisis Support

Signs and Effects of Workplace Bullying

Sherri Gordon, CLC is a published author, certified professional life coach, and bullying prevention expert. She's also the former editor of Columbus Parent and has countless years of experience writing and researching health and social issues.

research on bullying in the workplace

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

research on bullying in the workplace

Gpointstudio/Image Source/Getty Images

  • What Employers Can Do

Frequently Asked Questions

Workplace bullying is persistent mistreatment that occurs in the workplace. It can include behaviors such as verbal criticism, personal attacks, humiliation, belittling, and exclusion. It's important to note that anyone can be a bully or be bullied, regardless of the role they have in the workplace.

Unfortunately, bullying in the workplace is far from uncommon. According to a survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute, 30% of workers have directly experienced bullying while at work. People who work remotely were more likely to report such bullying, with 43.2% responding that they had been bullied on the job.  

Workplace bullying hurts the health and well-being of employees. It can also damage workplace productivity and performance. "Bullying's pernicious nature creates long-lasting scars that have an effect on the victim's sense of self-worth, self-assurance, and general mental health," says Azizi Marshall, LCPC , a licensed clinical professional counselor and founder of the Mental Health at Work Summit and Center for Creative Arts Therapy.

This article discusses some of the signs and effects of workplace bullying. It also covers its impact on the workplace and what people can do to help prevent this type of behavior.

Signs of Workplace Bullying

If you're a target of bullies in the workplace, you probably start each week with a pit of anxiety in your stomach. Then, you count down the days until the weekend or next vacation. Inappropriate behavior by adult bullies may include:

  • Berating people
  • Coercing people to do things they don't want to do
  • Dismissing someone's efforts
  • Embarrassing people in front of their employer, co-workers, or clients
  • Excluding others
  • Intimidating people
  • Lying to others
  • Making snide remarks
  • Minimizing others' concerns
  • Taking credit for other people's work
  • Threatening others
  • Criticizing others unfairly

Workplace bullying is not always overt or openly hostile. It can also take more subtle forms, including gaslighting , where the bully engages in abusive behaviors but then denies the abuse. The goal of gaslighting is to make the victim of bullying doubt their reality and experiences.

Subtle workplace bullying can hide in plain sight, but recognizing its more subtle signs can empower individuals to reclaim their worth.

According to Marshall, some of these more subtle types of workplace bullying can include:

  • Deliberately excluding people from conversations, decision-making, or work-related events
  • Purposely ignoring, disregarding, or avoiding someone, such as by "forgetting" to invite them to work meetings
  • Concealing or distorting information to achieve personal goals
  • Feigning ignorance, changing the subject, or canceling meetings to divert attention from an issue
  • Emotionally manipulating people by using shame or guilt to cause feelings of inadequacy, undue responsibility, or unworthiness
  • Undermining someone's work to hamper their progress or ability to succeed
  • Pitting people against one another to create a competitive, divisive environment
  • Changing someone's responsibilities to disrupt their work and interfere with their sense of purpose
  • Creating unrealistic or unattainable expectations or constantly shifting expectations to ensure failure
  • Unfairly criticizing people's work to hurt the other person's self-esteem

Effects of Workplace Bullying

Workplace bullying can have a range of negative effects. Research on bullying in the workplace quantifies the personal consequences for the victim and the fiscal consequences that affect the company's bottom line.

Health Risks

The effects of workplace bullying don't end when you leave the office. Experiencing bullying can cause physical and psychological health problems, including high blood pressure, mood changes, panic attacks, stress , and ulcers.

People who are bullied at work may also experience physical symptoms such as headaches, muscle tension, and changes in appetite. Bullying can impact sleep quality and duration as well.

Workplace bullying can contribute to increased stress, low self-esteem , and feelings of anxiety and depression. "One's sense of security is undermined by ongoing unpleasant interactions, which can cause anxiety, tension, and even melancholy," Marshall says.

Researchers have found that the coworkers of those who are bullied also experience negative effects, even when they themselves are not bullied. One study showed that victims of bullying and those who witness it are more likely to receive a prescription for psychotropic medications such as antidepressants, tranquilizers, and sleeping pills.

Bullying in the workplace can increase the risk of negative physical health effects and lead to decreased mental well-being for both the victims of bullying and their co-workers.

Effect on Job Performance

"Bullying at work has a negative impact on a person's ability to do their job. Due to the mental discomfort brought on by the bullying, victims frequently exhibit decreased productivity, increased absenteeism, and difficulties concentrating," explains Marshall.

Bullied workers cannot perform their jobs to the best of their ability. Performance issues include:

  • Inability to work or concentrate
  • Loss of self-esteem
  • Trouble making decisions
  • Lower productivity

Bullied workers not only lose motivation, they lose time because they are preoccupied with:

  • Avoiding the bully
  • Networking for support
  • Making plans to deal with the situation
  • Ruminating about the situation
  • Trying to defend themselves

Targets of bullying feel a sense of isolation.  Workplace bullying can leave the victim so traumatized that they feel powerless, disoriented, confused and helpless.

Changes in the Workplace

Workplace bullying has detrimental effects on employers, not just the victim and their co-workers who witness it. In addition to disrupting the work environment and impacting worker morale, it can also:

  • Create a hostile work environment
  • Impact workers compensation claims
  • Promote absenteeism
  • Reduce productivity
  • Result in costly, and possibly embarrassing legal issues​

Other effects on the employer include:

  • Additional costs to recruit and train new employees
  • Erosion of employee loyalty and commitment
  • Increased use of sick leave, health care claims, and staff turnover
  • Increased risk of legal action
  • Poor public image and negative publicity

Coping With Bullying in the Workplace

"To effectively respond to workplace bullying, it’s important to adopt an assertive and direct approach. Confronting the issue head-on and establishing clear consequences for unacceptable behavior is a must," explains Avigail Lev, PsyD , founder and director of the Bay Area CBT Center.

If you are being bullied at work, there are strategies that you can use to cope. Being proactive may help you feel better.

Set Boundaries

When a bully engages in abusive behavior, tell them what they have done and that it is unacceptable. Let them know that their behavior will not be tolerated and that if it occurs again, you will take action. Setting boundaries lets others know what type of behavior you are willing to accept. 

Marshall says that setting these boundaries to establish what is acceptable and improper can help you defend your rights and protect against future abuse.

Confront the Behavior

Once you establish a boundary, following through with the consequences is essential. Marshall suggests always remaining professional, avoiding retaliation, and utilizing "I" statements to assertively voice your concerns and address the specific behaviors that upset you.

If the abuse continues, call out the behavior the next time it happens. Ask them to leave until they can behave in a professional, work-appropriate manner. 

Therapist-Recommended Strategies

Other strategies that Lev recommends to cope with workplace bullying include:

  • Detached empathy : It can be helpful to detach yourself emotionally from the other person's actions while maintaining a certain level of empathy. According to Lev, this allows people to become less reactive while staying grounded.
  • Reverse DARVO: This self-defense strategy can be utilized to combat manipulation. "This involves recognizing and challenging the Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender tactics employed by the bully. It stands for Detach, Assert, Validate, and Observe. This helps people cultivate detached empathy and helps them stay non-reactive," Lev explains.
  • The BIFF technique : BIFF stands for Brief, Informative, Friendly, and Firm. Lev suggests it can be an effective way to cope with gaslighting in the workplace. "When confronted with gaslighting, responding in a BIFF manner involves keeping interactions brief and to the point, providing factual information without engaging in lengthy debates, maintaining a friendly tone, and asserting your position firmly," she explains.

Keep Track of the Abuse

Whenever you feel that you have been bullied at work, document the details including the time and exactly what happened. Write down any witnesses who were present and save any documents or records that can corroborate the abuse.

Talk to Management or Human Resources

If you've tried resolving the bullying on your own without success, it is time to involve your employer. Check with your workplace employee handbook to learn more about what steps you will need to take to file a complaint.

Marshall notes, however, that not all companies are great at addressing bullying. In such instances, it may be helpful to get outside assistance from legal counsel or an employee assistance program.

Care for Yourself

In addition to taking decisive action to protect yourself from bullying, it is also important to take steps to care for yourself. Seek out social support , practice relaxation strategies for stress, and consider talking to a mental health professional if you are experiencing symptoms of depression, anxiety, or distress.

Creating boundaries and directly confronting the behavior are two strategies that may stop bullies from targeting you. Recording and reporting the bullying is also important. You can also help care for yourself by seeking social support and talking to a therapist.

What Can Employers Do?

It's always in your best interest to confront workplace bullying and maintain a bullying-free workplace because prevention is more cost-effective than intervention or mediation. It's also the right thing to do if you care about your employees.

Workplaces can safeguard their employees' mental health and provide a pleasant and productive atmosphere for all by developing rules and procedures that condemn bullying, offering assistance options, and encouraging open communication.

Employers must offer education opportunities for managers, supervisors, and other authority figures, because the majority of workplace bullying comes from bosses. Strive to create a workplace environment that cultivates teamwork, cooperation, and positive interaction instead.

Employers should also take steps to reduce bullying in the workplace. Educate employees and managers about bullying and outline steps that workers can take if they are experiencing abuse in the workplace.

Workplace bullying can be openly hostile at times, but it can also take more subtle forms. In either case, it can take a serious toll on employee well-being and productivity. It is important to be able to recognize the signs of workplace bullying so that you can take action to protect yourself. Organizations can also take steps to reduce bullying, including helping employees learn how to respond when they witness someone being bullied at work.

Calling out the behavior and making it clear that it will not be tolerated are important actions, but it is also critical to care for yourself outside of the workplace. Talk to friends and loved ones, spend time doing things you enjoy, and look for ways to help relax. Talking to a therapist can also be helpful.

Check your employee handbook to see if it describes steps you should take to report bullying. This may involve talking to your manager or reporting the behavior to human resources (HR) so they can investigate. If your manager is the one engaging in bullying, you might need to report the behavior to HR or to someone who is a position higher up the chain of command.

Workplace bullying can involve a range of damaging actions that can involve verbal, nonverbal, psychological, or physical abuse. Examples can include threats, humiliation, excessive monitoring, unjustified criticism, intentionally lying about work duties, and intimidation.

Employers can help prevent bullying by making it a priority to create a supportive workplace and refusing to tolerate bullying behaviors. Co-workers can help by being supportive and speaking up if they witness abuse in the workplace.

Wu M, He Q, Imran M, Fu J. Workplace bullying, anxiety, and job performance: choosing between "passive resistance" or "swallowing the insult"? .  Front Psychol . 2020;10:2953. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02953

Workplace Bullying Institute. 2021 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey .

Nielsen MB, Magerøy N, Gjerstad J, Einarsen S. Workplace bullying and subsequent health problems . Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen . 2014;134(12-13):1233-1238. doi:10.4045/tidsskr.13.0880

Glambek M, Skogstad A, Einarsen S. Take it or leave: a five-year prospective study of workplace bullying and indicators of expulsion in working life .  Ind Health . 2015;53(2):160–170. doi:10.2486/indhealth.2014-0195

Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. Bullying in the workplace .

Lallukka T, Haukka J, Partonen T, Rahkonen O, Lahelma E. Workplace bullying and subsequent psychotropic medication: a cohort study with register linkages . BMJ Open . 2012;2(6). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001660

Robert F. Impact of workplace bullying on job performance and job stress .  J Manag Info . 2018;5(3):12-15. doi:10.31580/jmi.v5i3.123

Einarsen S, Skogstad A, Rørvik E, Lande ÅB, Nielsen MB. Climate for conflict management, exposure to workplace bullying and work engagement: a moderated mediation analysis .  Int J Hum Resour Manag . 2016;29(3):549-570. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1164216

By Sherri Gordon Sherri Gordon, CLC is a published author, certified professional life coach, and bullying prevention expert. She's also the former editor of Columbus Parent and has countless years of experience writing and researching health and social issues.

Book cover

Concepts, Approaches and Methods pp 507–531 Cite as

Qualitative Research Methods in the Study of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment

  • Renee L. Cowan 7 &
  • Allison Toth 8  
  • Reference work entry
  • First Online: 05 January 2021

720 Accesses

1 Citations

Part of the Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment book series (HWBEAH,volume 1)

Qualitative research methods have been used for over 20 years to explore and illuminate workplace bullying, emotional abuse and harassment. This chapter brings together this wealth of research, synthesizing and discussing the data collection techniques, samples and analytic methods used as well as the predominant themes and discoveries of this research. Synthesis of this research points to the bullying experience as a process, the risk factors of being bullied, reactions, outcomes, response processes and how targets resist and seek justice. Qualitative research efforts have begun to clarify other actors in bullying situations such as bystanders, witnesses and human resources (HR). Organizational policy and enactment of this policy have begun to be explored and further critiqued through these methods, as well as organizational characteristics that contribute to bullying. This synthesis brings into focus the strong contribution of a qualitative approach to research on bullying, emotional abuse and harassment and should continue to illuminate these phenomena into the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Archer, D. (1999). Exploring “bullying” culture in the para-military organisation. International Journal of Manpower, 20 (1/2), 94–105.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ayoko, O. B., Callan, V. J., & Härtel, C. E. (2003). Workplace conflict, bullying, and counterproductive behaviors. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11 (4), 283–301.

Baillien, E., Neyens, I., & De Witte, H. (2008). Organizational, team related and job related risk factors for bullying, violence and sexual harassment in the workplace: A qualitative study. International. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13 (2), 132–146.

Google Scholar  

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), 1–16.

Bloch, C. (2012). How do perpetrators experience bullying at the workplace? International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion, 5 (2), 159–177.

Boje, D. M. (2001). Narrative methods for organizational and communication research . London: Sage.

Book   Google Scholar  

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 , 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms in organizational analysis . London: Heineman Education Books.

Carey, M. A. (1994). The group effect in focus groups: Planning, implementing and interpreting focus group research. In J. Morse (Ed.), Critical issues in qualitative research methods (pp. 225–241). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Celep, C., & Konakli, T. (2013). Mobbing experiences of instructors: Causes, results, and solution suggestions. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13 (1), 193–199.

Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Cowan, R. L. (2009). “Rocking the boat” and “continuing to fight”: Un/productive episodes and the problem of workplace bullying. Human Communication, 12 , 283–302.

Cowan, R. L. (2011). “Yes, we have an anti-bullying policy, but…”: HR professionals’ understandings and experiences with workplace bullying policy. Communication Studies, 62 , 307–327.

Cowan, R. L. (2012). It’s complicated: Defining workplace bullying from the human resource professional’s perspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 26 , 377–403.

Cowan, R. L. (2013). “**it rolls downhill” and other attributions on why adult bullying happens in organizations from the human resource professional’s perspective. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 14 , 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/17459435.2013.835347

Cowan, R. L., & Fox, S. (2015). Being pushed and pulled: A model of U.S. HR professionals’ roles in workplace bullying situations. Personnel Review, 44 , 119–139. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2013-0210

Czarniawska, B. (1997). Narrating the organization. Dramas of institutional identity . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2010). The exit coping response to workplace bullying: The contribution of inclusivist and exclusivist HRM strategies. Employee Relations, 32 (2), 102–120.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2011). The limits to workplace friendship: Managerialist HRM and bystander behaviour in the context of workplace bullying. Employee Relations, 33 (3), 269–288.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2012). Clarifying my world: Identity work in the context of workplace bullying. The Qualitative Report, 17 (8), 1.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2013a). Breathers, releases, outlets and pauses: Employee resistance in the context of depersonalized bullying. The Qualitative Report, 18 (36), 1.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2013b). Navigating the extended reach: Target experiences of cyberbullying at work. Information and Organization, 23 (4), 324–343.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2014). The interface between technology and customer cyberbullying: Evidence from India. Information and Organization, 24 (3), 176–193.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2015). Ambivalence: Employee responses to depersonalized bullying at work. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 36 (1), 123–145.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2018). Target experiences of workplace bullying on online labour markets: Uncovering the nuances of resilience. Employee Relations, 40 (1), 139–154.

D’Cruz, P., Noronha, E., & Beale, D. (2014). The workplace bullying-organizational change interface: Emerging challenges for human resource management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25 (10), 1434–1459.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. D. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–19). London: Sage.

Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis for social scientists . London: Routledge.

Dhar, R. (2012). Why do they bully? Bullying behavior and its implication on the bullied. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 27 , 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2012.666463

Eberle, T. S. (2014). Phenomenology as research method. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Sage handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 184–202). London: Sage.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Efe, S. Y., & Ayaz, S. (2010). Mobbing against nurses in the workplace in Turkey. International Nursing Review, 57 (3), 328–334.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ellingson, L. (2008). Engaging crystallization in qualitative research . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Fahie, D. (2014). Doing sensitive research sensitively: Ethical and methodological issues in researching workplace bullying. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13 (1), 19–36.

Ferris, P. (2004). A preliminary typology of organisational response to allegations of workplace bullying: See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 32 (3), 389–395.

Fisher, W.R. (1984). Narration as human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communication Monographs, 51 , 1–22.

Flick, U. (2014). The Sage handbook of qualitative data analysis . London: Sage.

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). Grounded theory: The discovery of grounded theory. Sociology The Journal of The British Sociological Association, 12 , 27–49.

Hallberg, L. R., & Strandmark, M. K. (2006). Health consequences of workplace bullying: Experiences from the perspective of employees in the public service sector. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 1 (2), 109–119.

Harrington, S., Rayner, C., & Warren, S. (2012). Too hot to handle? Trust and human resource practitioners’ implementation of anti-bullying policy. Human Resource Management Journal, 22 (4), 392–408.

Harrington, S., Warren, S., & Rayner, C. (2015). Human resource management practitioners’ responses to workplace bullying: Cycles of symbolic violence. Organization, 22 (3), 368–389.

Hodson, R., Roscigno, V. J., & Lopez, S. H. (2006). Chaos and the abuse of power: Workplace bullying in organizational and interactional context. Work and Occupations, 33 (4), 382–416.

Holbrook, M. B. (2005). Customer value and autoethnography: Subjective personal introspection and the meanings of a photograph collection. Journal of Business Research, 58 (1), 45–61.

Hutchinson, M., Vickers, M. H., Jackson, D., & Wilkes, L. (2005). “I’m gonna do what I wanna do.” Organizational change as a legitimized vehicle for bullies. Health Care Management Review, 30 (4), 331–336.

Hutchinson, M., Vickers, M. H., Jackson, D., & Wilkes, L. (2006). Like wolves in a pack: Predatory alliances of bullies in nursing. Journal of Management & Organization, 12 (3), 235–250.

Hutchinson, M., Vickers, M. H., Wilkes, L., & Jackson, D. (2009). “The worse you behave, the more you seem, to be rewarded”: Bullying in nursing as organizational corruption. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 21 (3), 213–229.

Hutchinson, M., Vickers, M. H., Wilkes, L., & Jackson, D. (2010). A typology of bullying behaviours: The experiences of Australian nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19 (15–16), 2319–2328.

Jenkins, M. F., Zapf, D., Winefield, H., & Sarris, A. (2012). Bullying allegations from the accused bully's perspective. British Journal of Management, 23 (4), 489–501.

Karatuna, I. (2015). Targets’ coping with workplace bullying: A qualitative study. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 10 (1), 21–37.

Keashly, L. (2001). Interpersonal and systemic aspects of emotional abuse at work: The target’s perspective. Violence and Victims, 16 (3), 233–268.

Lee, D. (2000). An analysis of workplace bullying in the UK. Personnel Review, 29 (5), 593–610.

Lewis, D. (1999). Workplace bullying–interim findings of a study in further and higher education in Wales. International Journal of Manpower, 20 (1/2), 106–119.

Lewis, D. (2004). Bullying at work: The impact of shame among university and college lecturers. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 32 (3), 281–299.

Lewis, S. E. (2006). Recognition of workplace bullying: A qualitative study of women targets in the public sector. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 16 (2), 119–135.

Lewis, S. E., & Orford, J. (2005). Women’s experiences of workplace bullying: Changes in social relationships. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 15 (1), 29–47.

Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5 (2), 165–184.

Liefooghe, A. P., & Olafsson, R. (1999). “Scientists” and “amateurs”: Mapping the bullying domain. International Journal of Manpower, 20 (1/2), 39–49.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 9, p. 438). London: Sage.

Lindloff, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2003). The communicative cycle of employee emotional abuse: Generation and regeneration of workplace mistreatment. Management Communication Quarterly, 16 (4), 471–501.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and…: Quitting and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Communication Monographs, 73 (4), 406–433.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2008). Intensive remedial identity work: Responses to workplace bullying trauma and stigmatization. Organization, 15 (1), 97–119.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & McDermott, V. (2011). Making sense of supervisory bullying: Perceived powerlessness, empowered possibilities. Southern Communication Journal, 76 (4), 342–368.

MacIntosh, J. (2006). Tackling work place bullying. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 27 (6), 665–679.

MacIntosh, J. (2012). Workplace bullying influences women’s engagement in the workforce. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 33 (11), 762–768.

Miller, H., & Rayner, C. (2012). The form and function of “bullying” behaviors in a strong occupational culture: Bullying in a UK police service. Group & Organization Management, 37 (3), 347–375.

O’Donnell, S. M., & MacIntosh, J. A. (2016). Gender and workplace bullying: men’s experiences of surviving bullying at work. Qualitative Health Research, 26 (3), 351–366.

Owen, W. F. (1984). Interpretive themes in relational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70 , 274–287.

Roscigno, V. J., Lopez, S. H., & Hodson, R. (2009). Supervisory bullying, status inequalities and organizational context. Social Forces, 87 (3), 1561–1589.

Shallcross, L., Ramsay, S., & Barker, M. (2008a). Workplace mobbing: Expulsion, exclusion, and transformation . In 22nd ANZAM Conference 2008: Managing in the Pacific century conference proceedings, Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM), University of Auckland, Auckland.

Shallcross, L., Sheehan, M., & Ramsay, S. (2008b). Workplace mobbing: Experiences in the public sector. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 13 (2), 56–70.

Simons, S. R., & Mawn, B. (2010). Bullying in the workplace—A qualitative study of newly licensed registered nurses. AAOHN Journal, 58 (7), 305–311.

Sobre-Denton, M. S. (2012). Stories from the cage: Autoethnographic sensemaking of workplace bullying, gender discrimination, and white privilege. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 41 (2), 220–250.

Strandmark, M. K., & 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 (3), 332–341.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques . Newbury Park: Sage.

Sumner, E. M., Scarduzio, J. A., & Daggett, J. R. (2016). Drama at Dunder Mifflin: Workplace bullying discourse on the Office. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Published online before print. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516681158

Tirscher, S., Meyer, M., Wodak, R., & Vetter, E. (2000). Methods of text and discourse analysis . London: Sage.

Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, and communication impact . Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

Tracy, S. J., Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Alberts, J. K. (2006). Nightmares, demons and slaves: Exploring the painful metaphors of workplace bullying. Management Communication Quarterly, 20 , 148–185.

Tye-Williams, S., & Krone, K. J. (2015). Chaos, reports, and quests: Narrative agency and co-workers in stories of workplace bullying. Management Communication Quarterly, 29 , 3–27.

Tye-Williams, S., & Krone, K. J. (2017). Identifying and re-imagining the paradox of workplace bullying advice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 45 (2), 218–235.

Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Vickers, M. H. (2007). Autoethnography as sensemaking: A story of bullying. Culture and Organization, 13 (3), 223–237.

Yaman, E. (2010). Perception of faculty members exposed to mobbing about the organizational culture and climate. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 10 (1), 567–578.

Zabrodska, K., Ellwood, C., Zaeemdar, S., & Mudrak, J. (2016). Workplace bullying as sensemaking: An analysis of target and actor perspectives on initial hostile interactions. Culture and Organization, 22 (2), 136–157.

Zapf, D., & Gross, C. (2001). Conflict escalation and coping with workplace bullying: A replication and extension. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10 (4), 497–522.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Queens University of Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA

Renee L. Cowan

University of North Carolina, Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA

Allison Toth

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renee L. Cowan .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India

Premilla D'Cruz

Ernesto Noronha

Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

Guy Notelaers

Portsmouth Business School, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

Charlotte Rayner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Cowan, R.L., Toth, A. (2021). Qualitative Research Methods in the Study of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment. In: D'Cruz, P., Noronha, E., Notelaers, G., Rayner, C. (eds) Concepts, Approaches and Methods. Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment, vol 1. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0134-6_16

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0134-6_16

Published : 05 January 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-13-0133-9

Online ISBN : 978-981-13-0134-6

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

research on bullying in the workplace

Research by WBI

White Spacer

2017 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey

2017 Prevalence

2014 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey

research on bullying in the workplace

2010 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey

2010 prevalence

2007 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey

2007 prevalence

WBI Online Surveys – 2008-2014

Because survey respondents, targets and witnesses, were “self-selected” by visiting a website with “workplace bullying” in its name. The surveys are not “scientific.” However, we can confidently describe the world of bullied targets accurately, relying on targets themselves as our empirical guide through their responses to the surveys.

More Help for Bullied Targets

Help for Bullied Workers

Workplace Bullying Training

WBI Research

Expert Witness

Freedom Week

A Needed Law

Workplace Bullying Institute © 2024. WBI is a Social Purpose Corporation.

The Boston Globe

The psychological abuse of workplace bullying

I n October, the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development heard testimony in support of the Workplace Psychological Safety Act, one of two pieces of legislation focused on protecting employees from bullying and other kinds of workplace intimidation that are currently making their way through the Legislature.

Workers, employment lawyers, human resources professionals, and others detailed their experiences with bullying and psychological abuse, including the loss of careers, income, and their mental and physical health. The testimony included stories of employees being ostracized; isolated; micromanaged; having their pay or duties changed; being left out of critical conversations, events and projects; and having their concerns go unanswered. Through tears, one woman described going to work “like going into a leopard’s cage.” An employment lawyer highlighted the single mothers he has represented who have been the targets of workplace bullying. “Why did they tolerate it? Because the rent is past due, because the electricity is shut off, because the oil tank is empty.”

Rare is the worker who hasn’t had a bad day at the office. Many of us have been there. I know I have. Talking and writing about toxic workplaces has become normal these days, particularly after the rise of #MeToo campaigns that outed serial abusers and bullies. But defining what makes a workplace toxic and how to manage accusations of toxicity are less clear. But that doesn’t mean that bullying isn’t real. In fact I’ve heard from people in many industries whose workplaces left them emotionally and financially bereft.

I’ve witnessed managers either unwilling or incapable of dealing with toxic office behavior. The combination of internal politics, where only certain employees are protected, and a lack of human resources policies to identify and manage bullying are to blame. I often think about an executive who told me they “were not going to get in the middle” of a particularly thorny work relationship, considering it more of a personality clash between employees than an actual personnel issue.

According to a 2021 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute , approximately 48 million Americans say they’ve been bullied at work. (The WBI defines bullying as a “non-physical form of workplace violence” that includes “abusive conduct that is threatening, intimidating, humiliating, work sabotage or verbal abuse.”) The report found that workers of all political ideologies experienced bullying, but liberals said they were targeted more than moderates and conservatives. Even remote workers said they had experienced bullying on Zoom calls and other digital interactions with co-workers.

At the moment, Massachusetts employment law covers discrimination against workers who are considered part of a protected class, which is defined by a person’s race or ethnicity, disability, gender, age, or religion. People who fall outside of these categories are hard pressed to find lawyers who will take their claims of workplace abuse and will “pretty much fall through the cracks,” David Yamada said in an interview. Yamada is a professor at Suffolk University Law School and an author of one of the bills, which he testified in favor of in October.

Broadening the scope of who can file a lawsuit for occupational bullying and removing the protected-class clause would get at the less obvious forms of abuse. Yamada gave the example of a misogynist who is bullying someone but is smart enough not to use any vulgarity so their actions don’t have “the classic sexualized content that people associate with sexual harassment and a hostile work environment.” Instead the misogynist could treat female employees differently than male employees by more covert actions like isolating them from their peers, blaming them for things out of their control, or gaslighting them.

According to WBI’s report, two-thirds of bullies are men, which supports the image of bullies as belligerent bosses who intimidate and harass their subordinates, who tend to be women. But bullies and toxic workplaces can take many forms. Women can bully women, subordinates can bully bosses, and colleagues can bully each other.

In 2022, in the Harvard Business Review, researchers also explained how bullying behaviors can be direct or indirect (yelling at someone versus spreading rumors about a person) and overt or covert (humiliating someone in front of their peers versus withholding important information from them). Regardless, activists, experts, and victims say the results of such behaviors are devastating and not enough is being done to minimize the harm or prevent bullying from happening in the first place.

Vicki Courtemanche and Debra Falzoi are cofounders of the group End Workplace Abuse , which put forth many of the witnesses at the October hearing. Both of the women say they were victims of workplace bullying of varying degrees. Courtemanche, who is in her 60s, told me she hasn’t worked in five and a half years after a bout of workplace bullying left her “physically, mentally, and financially” incapacitated. Falzoi also shared her experience with me about being bullied at a school where she worked. Falzoi said that when she raised her concerns with the human resources department, they “were empathetic to a point” but did not take action to correct the bully. “I couldn’t believe there were no consequences,” Falzoi said.

Proponents of each of the bills agree on the basic premise that workplace bullying must be managed, but they disagree on how far the bills should go. The intent behind both bills is to allow employees the ability to sue their employers for bullying, similar to the leverage given to sexual harassment victims or those harmed by occupational health and safety violations.

Part of the schism is that bullying also flies in the face of the newer emerging workplace philosophy of “psychological safety,” which says that employees should be supported and not punished for airing their concerns, grievances, or ideas. In a past column, I wrote that employees can’t have “psychological safety” if they can be fired at any time. Courtemanche and supporters of the Workplace Psychological Safety Act say they plan to take on “at will” employment too, by challenging the right for companies to fire people as they wish.

That’s a step too far for Yamada and supporters of the less restrictive Healthy Workplace bill. “It’s one thing to create a law that states that you cannot treat people abusively at work,” Yamada told me. But attempting to create an environment of so-called psychological safety is akin to “trying to mandate a state of mind, which is often less about the law and more about the integrity of people in the workplace.”

In short, you might not be able to force your colleagues to be kind but you should be able to sue them if they cross the line.

The fate of both bills will be determined in the next year.

Tanzina Vega is a journalist whose work focuses on inequality. She is a contributing Globe Opinion writer.

The psychological abuse of workplace bullying

Being Bullied in Childhood More Than Triples Risk of Mental Health Struggles Later

By Carole Tanzer Miller HealthDay Reporter

research on bullying in the workplace

WEDNESDAY, Feb. 14, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- When bullies destroy a young victim's trust, mental health problems are likely to follow them into adulthood, a new study warns.

"There are few public health topics more important than youth mental health right now," said senior study author George Slavich , director of UCLA Health's Laboratory for Stress Assessment and Research, who called for investments in further research to identify risk factors and develop programs to improve lifelong health and resilience.

Working with the University of Glasgow, his team looked at data from 10,000 children in the U.K. who were followed for nearly 20 years. 

Researchers found that kids who were bullied at age 11 and then became distrustful by age 14 were roughly 3.5 times more likely to have mental health problems by age 17 than those who were more trusting.

U.S. Cities With the Most Homelessness

research on bullying in the workplace

The findings were published Feb. 13 in the journal Nature Mental Health .

Researchers believe the study is the first to probe the link between peer bullying, interpersonal distrust and development of mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, hyperactivity and anger.

Slavich said the findings could help schools and other institutions develop programs to address mental health impacts of bullying.

The mental health of young people is a growing public concern.

In a sample of U.S. high school students, 44.2% said they had been depressed for at least two weeks in 2021, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Ten percent said they had tried to take their own life.

While other research has linked bullying to mental and behavioral issues among youth, this is believed to be the first to confirm how bullying leads to distrust and, in turn, mental problems in late adolescence.

"What these data suggest is that we really need school-based programs that help foster a sense of interpersonal trust at the level of classroom and school," Slavich said in a UCLA news release. "One way to do that would be to develop evidence-based programs that are especially focused on the transition to high school and college, and that frame school as an opportunity to develop close, long-lasting relationships."

More information

Stopbullying.gov has tips for dealing with bullies .

SOURCE: University of California Los Angeles Health Sciences, news release, Feb. 13, 2024

Copyright © 2024 HealthDay . All rights reserved.

Join the Conversation

Tags: psychology

research on bullying in the workplace

Health News Bulletin

Stay informed on the latest news on health and COVID-19 from the editors at U.S. News & World Report.

Sign in to manage your newsletters »

Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy .

You May Also Like

The 10 worst presidents.

U.S. News Staff Jan. 26, 2024

research on bullying in the workplace

Cartoons on President Donald Trump

Feb. 1, 2017, at 1:24 p.m.

research on bullying in the workplace

Photos: Obama Behind the Scenes

April 8, 2022

research on bullying in the workplace

Photos: Who Supports Joe Biden?

March 11, 2020

research on bullying in the workplace

No ‘24 Recession, Leading Indicators Say

Tim Smart Feb. 20, 2024

research on bullying in the workplace

Where Are the Economy and Rates Headed?

research on bullying in the workplace

States Home to the Most Presidents

Sara Clarke and Brianna Navarre Feb. 19, 2024

research on bullying in the workplace

Key Quotes From Engoron’s Trump Ruling

U.S. News Staff Feb. 16, 2024

research on bullying in the workplace

Judge Eviscerates Trump Business Empire

Lauren Camera Feb. 16, 2024

research on bullying in the workplace

Biden: Putin to Blame for Navalny Death

Susan Milligan Feb. 16, 2024

research on bullying in the workplace

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Logo of phenaturepg

Workplace Bullying, Engagement and Employability: Moderating Role of Organization-Based Self-Esteem

Nimmi p. m..

1 SCMS Cochin School of Business, Kochi, Kerala India

Geetha Jose

2 Bharata Mata Institute of Management, Kochi, India

Maria Tresita Paul Vincent

3 Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International School of Textiles & Management, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu India

Anjali John

4 Marthoma College of Management, Perumbavoor, India

The present research paper aims to examine the influence of workplace bullying on employee work outcomes in terms of employee engagement and perceived internal employability. The paper also analyses the moderating role of organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) in the relationship between workplace bullying and employee work outcomes. The authors relied on cross-sectional data from teaching faculty across universities and colleges in South India to validate hypotheses empirically. The proposed model was tested using Warp-PLS and PROCESS macro in SPSS. The study reported a significant negative influence of workplace bullying on perceived internal employability and employee engagement. The study also found that OBSE positively moderated the negative relationship between workplace bullying and employee work outcomes in terms of engaging employees and perceived employability. The unique aspect of this research is that it is the first time the moderating role of OBSE is discussed in bullying literature. The study puts across OBSE as a positive organization related construct that can nullify the negative impacts of workplace bullying. OBSE is a crucial resource in annualizing the negative effect of bullying in the workplace. Policymakers should imbibe OBSE as a crucial factor in the policies and ethics of their organization for enhancing employee engagement and employability.

Introduction

Daily interactions in the workplace establish critical grounds based on which organizational members are respected or not as respected. These interactions are also vital aspects that transfer the sense of belongingness and worth to the members (Nguyen et al., 2019 ). This unique sense of significance derived from interactions is at the heart of the human experience and psychological needs (Rogers & Ashforth, 2017 ). During such social exchanges, negative interactions may occur like workplace bullying, incivility, abusive supervision, deviance, harassment, emotional abuse, and social undermining (Mao et al., 2019 ; Jacobsen et al., 2018 ). Amongst these, even after 30 years of research, bullying remains a prominent issue that workplaces must solve (Agarwala, 2018 ; Krishna & Soumyaja, 2020 ). Workplace bullying is established as a serious work demand and has received much attention in the organizational psychology and behaviour literature in the last decade (Agarwala, 2018 ; Arshad & Ismail, 2018 ; Bartlett & Bartlett, 2011 ; Conway et al., 2021 ; Gardner et al., 2016 ; Glambek et al., 2018 ; Gupta, 2013 ; Hogh et al., 2021 ; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012 ; Rai & Agarwal, 2017 ; Tuckey et al., 2017 ; Verkuil et al., 2015 ).

In India, teaching as a profession is considered noble; despite this, ‘Indian academia’ reports a high rate of workplace bullying (Agarwala, 2018 ; Gupta, 2013 ; Krishna & Soumyaja, 2020 ). Workplace bullying is described as a category of harassing behaviour that employees may be subjected to at any stage of their career, regardless of their membership in a protected class based on gender, ethnicity, age, etc. (Leymann, 1990 ). The repercussion of workplace bullying in academia is often reflected in the behaviour towards other stakeholders in an immediate environment like students. This vicious spillover effect may also be reflected in other work outcomes (Krishna & Soumyaja, 2020 ). However, research examining outcomes of workplace bullying literature in Indian academia is comparatively less (Agarwala, 2018 ; Gupta, 2013 ; Krishna & Soumyaja, 2020 ). Recent research identified that the literature on workplace bullying in India lacks studies on the antecedents and consequences of workplace bullying at the national, societal, and cultural levels, emphasizing future research in this direction (Gupta et al., 2020 ). Given these gaps in bullying literature in Indian academia, the present study is a modest attempt to address how workplace bullying influences work outcomes among Indian academics.

Adverse effects of bullying affect the organizational sustainability of higher educational institutions (Muazzam et al., 2020 ). Organizational sustainability is associated with how engaged/associated employees are with their work and organization (Glavas, 2012 ; Zayed et al., 2020 ). Activities that demoralize employees’ enthusiasm for the organization can negatively impact organizational sustainability and growth. Moreover, workplace victimization can lead to absence of employees, reduced morale and motivation, and reduced productivity (Law et al., 2011 ). Although studies on workplace bullying and adverse work outcomes, like turnover intention (Coetzee & van Dyk, 2018 ), workplace incivility (Meires, 2018 ), and deviant behaviours (Sarwar et al., 2020 ), have yielded an understanding of the negative impact of bullying. The impact of workplace bullying and its relationship with positive work outcomes remain underexplored (Rai & Agarwal, 2017 ). While workplace bullying can have profound consequences in the work purview, it is vital to comprehend further workplace bullying and its interactions with positive outcomes in the work domain, like employee engagement and internal employability.

Sustainable growth of organizations is achieved by developing human resources and having a positive mindset at work. A highly engaged workforce is quintessential for the success of an organization. Commitment and belongingness towards the organization are evident while assessing employees’ perceived internal employability as it indicates whether employees plan to continue with the organization (Nimmi et al., 2020 ). From an employee perspective, an optimum balance between resources and demands is essential for a sustainable career.

Perceived internal employability is an indicator of increased productivity and higher retention of employees (Sánchez-Manjavacas et al., 2014 ). A greater sense of employability is associated with career satisfaction and wellbeing (Gowan, 2012 ). Employees with higher internal employability perceptions are confident that they are competent and competitive. Referred to as employees’ alignment of current and future career prospects within the company, perceived employability is affected by individual differences. External realities relating to work and work environment help to nurture or hinder perceived internal employability (Cerdin et al., 2020 ). Uncertainties and contingencies at work results in less cognitive resources for employees which can negatively impact their internal employability perceptions (Cerdin et al., 2020 ).

Employee engagement can be defined as a “ positive, active, work-related psychological state operationalized by the maintenance, intensity, and direction of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral energy ” (Shuck et al., 2017 , p. 269). Kahn conceptualizes engagement as harnessing selves in one’s work roles cognitively, physically, and emotionally, driving in-role behaviours (May et al., 2004 ). The psychological conditions of meanigfulness,safety and availability has to be met for engaging the employees (Kahn,  1990 ). Research revealed that psychological conditions influence the overall employee engagements. (Allen & Rogelberg, 2013 ). Engagement creates a psychological connectedness with employees’ work, and engaged employees encompass high levels of energy and are enthusiastic about their work. They also often get fully engrossed in their work and execute their role and responsibilities at a higher quality level. In organisations harmful social stressors like workplace bullying causes disengagement and disrupts the organisational productivity, increased intent to quit and decreased employee performance (Trépanier et al., 2013 ; Serban et al., 2022 ). Thus, when the psychological conditions are not met in the organizations, it can affect the employee’s psychological health. Employee disengagement is a prominent indicator of such poor psychological health in employees.

Resource theory literature (Hobfoll, 2012 ) highlights the importance of resource caravans and resource passageways for a sustainable career. Bullying is characterized as a job demand that drains out the positive resources in an employee. More and more resources are needed to buffer the drain of resources. Theoretically, the study draws from the conservation of resources theory to decipher how workplace bullying negatively influences employee engagement and internal employability and how an organizational resource could mitigate this negative effect. The study proposes that developing organization-based self-esteem can potentially protect employees from the detrimental effects of bullying. Practically, this study provides insights into mitigating the adverse effects of bullying in the workplace and how organizations can play a role. The purpose of our paper is thus two-fold. First, to see if bullying negatively predicts employee engagement and perceived internal employability among academics in India as a case. Second, to look into whether OBSE moderates the negative relationships between the above said variables.

Theoretical Framework

Our study is positioned on the conservation of resource theory (COR theory). According to COR theory, “ people strive to retain, protect, and build resources and that what is threatening to them is the potential or actual loss of these valued resources , Hobfoll ( 1989 , p.513)”. COR theory introduces resource passageways, representing how the external environment, including work and non-work environment, can promote or hinder one’s resource gain. In this study, we place bullying as a job demand. The job demand ought to have a depleting role on job resources. At a work setting, employee engagement and perceived internal employability are considered an outcome of resource perceptions. The study proposes that bullying as a job demand depletes the job resources and negatively impacts engagement and internal employability. The study then places OBSE as a resource passageway instigated within an employee by the organization. Thus, developed self-esteem in employees protects and safeguard them against incivility experienced by them at the workplace.

Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

Workplace bullying and employee engagement.

Personnel engagement is conceptualized as “the harnessing of organization members’ to their work roles; i.e., in engagement, people express and employ physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role performances (Kahn, 1990 , 694)”. Engagement is about the willingness to invest oneself and expend an open effort to help the employer succeed. Employee engagement consists of three facets: trait engagement, behaviour engagement, and psychological state engagement (Macey & Schneider, 2008 ). Employee engagement is a crucial competitive advantage factor in human resource management practices (Albrecht et al., 2015 ). Saks ( 2019 ), in his study on the antecedents and consequences of employee engagement, stated a positive and significant relationship of employee engagement with job performance, organization commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviour. Employee engagement can be better understood by understanding the sources creating employee engagement.

The COR theory gets aligned with this perspective. The demands and resources employees collect in the organization play a vital role in engaging them. This is because employees’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation gets strongly influenced by these demands and resources, which results in their engagement level (Nazir & Islam, 2017 ; Tesi, 2021 ). Workplace bullying covers a set of negative behaviours aimed toward an individual at the workplace (Einarsen et al., 2009 ). Bullying acts as a job demand that drains out the resources of an employee and negatively impacts the positive job outcomes of employees. Workplace bullying is primarily defined as “ repetitive acts of harassment, such as social isolation and verbal abuse, which one or more perpetrators commit over an extended period (six months or more) ” (Einarsen et al., 2020 , p.22). There are a series of negative consequences of workplace bullying (Coetzee & van Dyk, 2018 ; Meires, 2018 ; Sarwar et al., 2020 ). Engagement with work or organization is the result of actual or anticipated resource gain enhancing energetic resources. The washout of resources due to bullying can reduce engagement with the organization. Based on previous empirical findings (e.g., Einarsen et al., 2018 ; Meriläinen et al., 2019 ; Park & Ono, 2017 ), based on the above discussions, we hypothesize that workplace bullying is negatively related to engagement, especially employee engagement.

  • H1: Workplace bullying negatively predicts employee engagement

Workplace Bullying and Perceived Internal Employability

Employability perception is defined as an individual’s perception of his or her chances of attaining and maintaining employment (Vanhercke et al., 2014 ). Assessing employability perceptions is essential as employees’ perceptions rather than reality activate their cognitions and behaviours (Vanhercke et al., 2014 ; Nimmi et al., 2020 ). There are two dimensions of perceived employability, namely, perceived internal employability and perceived external employability. According to Rothwell and Arnold ( 2007 ), internal employability is the perceived value of the occupation with the current employer or within the labour market. In contrast, external employability reflects the perceived value of employment in the external labour market.

Research reveal that, employability is a key job resource, impacting the subjective career success and job performance within organizations. (Bozionelos et al., 2016 ). The COR theory places perceived employability as a vital resource (Kirves, 2014 ) to enable an individual to adapt to the changing work environment (Baruch, 2014 ; Baruch & Rousseau, 2019 ) and as an individual coping mechanism for job security and a sustainable career (Donald et al., 2020 ). Perceived employability is considered an outcome of interactions between structural factors (Job market and Organisational) and internal factors (Berntson,  2008 ). Several factors like training, work experience, interpersonal relationships, and constructs like, protean career attitude, and spirituality affect the employability perceptions of a person (Cortellazzo et al., 2020 ; Groot & Van Den Brink, 2000 ; Nimmi et al., 2020 ; Nimmi et al., 2021 ). Organizational factors like HRM practices are associated with perceived internal employability (Akkermans et al.,  2020 ). Perceived internal employability explains organizational outcomes like desired commitment, loyalty, adaptability, and productivity (Sánchez-Manjavacas et al., 2014 ). It is an indicator of enhanced commitment towards the organization and output of developmental activities provided by the organization. However, work demands like workplace bullying, which deplete resources, have a detrimental effect on internal employability as different bullying activities manifest into different adverse outcomes. Bullying depletes the resources like self-esteem, self-confidence, physical and mental health, trust in the organization and colleagues (Krishna & Soumyaja,  2020 ). As these resources see a downfall, workplace bullying can be detrimental to the internal employability perceptions of individuals and job insecurity (Krishna & Soumyaja, 2020 ). Thus, we hypothesize that,

  • H2: Workplace bullying negatively predicts perceived internal employability.

The Moderating Role of OBSE

Pierce et al. ( 1989 ) introduced the concept of organization-based self-esteem as a multifaceted phenomenon. Organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) is defined as “the degree to which an individual believes him/herself to be capable, significant, and worthy as an organizational member.” The concept elaborates self-esteem, which has been studied in the individual context, to an organizational context where one’s self-evaluation of his/her worthiness as an organizational member is assessed. High OBSE indicates individuals consider themselves as essential and competent enough to be employable in that particular organization (Pierce & Gardner, 2004 ) and are highly satisfied with the treatment in the particular organization. OBSE is a self-concept (personal resource) developed at the individual level, based on social exchange within the organization. According to Xanthopoulou et al. ( 2007 ), personal resources moderate the link between job demands and work outcomes. In this context, employees who enjoy a stronger sense of self-esteem can be expected to exhibit a stronger sense of performance than their low self-esteem counterparts (Paul V & Devi, 2018 , 2020 ).

Recent research has revealed that psychological empowerment substantially affects employee engagement (Joo et al., 2019 ). OBSE is an essential psychological empowerment resource for employees. In the organizational context, people with high self-esteem or high levels of OBSE may be less responsive to adverse effects than employees with low levels of OBSE (Hui & Lee, 2000 ). When threatened by a hostile work atmosphere, employees with high OBSE may cope more than employees having low OBSE (Arshadi & Damiri,  2013 ). The theoretical explanation for the moderating role of OBSE comes from its role as a resource passageway. First is that OBSE acts as a resource caravan passageway helps to maintain resource caravan by compensating for resources lost at the job (Hobfoll, 2012 ). OBSE moderates the relationship as ‘ resource passageway function’ as it can diminish the side effects of adverse workplace habits. So OBSE helps an individual to cope up with the negative impacts of workplace bullying. Based on the assumptions we propose,

  • H3: OBSE positively moderates the negative relationship between Workplace bullying and employee engagement; such that the negative relationship between workplace bullying and employee engagement is weaker for those who are high in OBSE.
  • H4: OBSE positively moderates the negative relationship between Workplace bullying and perceived internal employability; such that the negative relationship between workplace bullying and internal employability is weaker for those who are high in OBSE.

So based on the propositions a theoretical model was framed, depicted in Fig.  1 which was theoretically tested,

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 10672_2022_9420_Fig1_HTML.jpg

Proposed theoretical model

Methodology

Methods and participants.

The core aim of this study was to investigate the linkage between workplace bullying with employee engagement and employability. It also examined how OBSE moderates the relationship mentioned above among university teachers.

The population of the study constitutes permanent teachers employed with recognised Indian universities and their affiliated colleges spread across Kerala and Tamil Nadu, in South India. Convenience sampling was chosen for the study considering the special interventions of Covid 19 pandemic. The methodological rigour followed in this study can subdue the apprehensions of choosing convenience sampling method in this cross-sectional study. Limiting respondents to the above criteria made OBSE, employee engagement, and employability relevant issues for the individual. An online survey was floated through the mail. Participants were assured strict academic usage of collected data and anonymity of their responses. Screening 269 reverted responses, nine were cast off due to incompletion, resulting in a sample size of 260.

Perceived Internal Employability was assessed via 4-items based on the scale developed by Rothwell and Arnold ( 2007 ). The perceived value of occupation in the current organization (internal employability) with four items. A sample item was “ Even if there was downsizing in this organization, I am confident that I would be retained .”

Organisation Based Self-Esteem was assessed with a ten-item scale developed by Pierce et al. ( 1989 ). A sample item was “ I am taken seriously around here ”.

Employee engagement was assessed using a UWES -9 developed by Schaufeli et al. ( 2006 ) containing 9 items. A sample item is “I feel happy when I am working intensely”.

Workplace bullying was assessed using a Short Negative Acts Questionnaire containing 9 items developed by Notelaers, Hoel, van der Heijden and Einarsen et al. ( 2018 ). A sample item is “in the past six months I experienced persistent criticism about my work and effort”.

Control Variables

Gender, total experience, years of experience in the current organization were controlled in the study as previous studies have denoted the impact of these variables on outcome variables (Pierce et al., 1989 ; Donald et al., 2019 ).

Data Analysis Strategy

The Warp PLS was used to conduct confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), examining adopted study measures’ measurement model and validity. Thus, confirming the discriminant and convergent validity of the instrument items. Subsequently, using the PROCESS macro in SPSS 23.0 (Hayes, 2013 ) with 5000 bootstrapped samples following Preacher and Hayes ( 2008 ), the structural equation model (SEM) was performed to test the hypothesized moderation model. Out of 260 respondents, 161 were female, and 99 were male. Also, 35% of teachers were below 25 years, 26% were between 26 and 35 years, 21% were between 36 and 45 years, 7% were between 46 and 55 years, and the remaining 11% were above the age of 55 years.

Further analysis was done in two stages. In the first stage, Harmon’s single factor test was applied to check for common method bias. Initial descriptive tests were conducted using SPSS software. Then the reliability and validity of the scales were assured. The reliability of the scales was assessed using Cron-Bach alpha values. In the second stage of the study, the hypotheses were tested using structural equation modelling using Warp-PLS. The moderation effects were assessed using SPSS Macro- Hayes Model Template 1.

Results and Analysis

Descriptive statistics.

The fit of the proposed model depicted in Fig. ​ Fig.1 1 was tested with Warp-PLS v.6.0 statistical software (Kock,  2015 ). Each of the constructs like Bullying, OBSE are represented by latent factors. And each latent factors were assessed using specific scale items. Fit Indices are provided in Table.  1 , which permits an acceptable fit for the model.

Fit indices

The mean, standard deviation, and correlations (Table  2 ) indicated a reliable correlation for the variables under study.

Correlation table

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

The convergent and discriminant validity was assessed using average extracted variance (AVE) and maximum shared variance (MSV); which found to be above threshold levels and approves validity and reliability tests for the measures (Table.  3 ). The reliability of the constructs (Cron-Bach values) was above the accepted threshold (Workplace Bullying - 0.87, OBSE - 0.89, Perceived Internal Employability - 0.87, Employee Engagement - 0.86).

Measurement model statistics

Hypothesis Testing

In order to assess the direct effects, path analysis was conducted with workplace bullying as the predictor and employee engagement and perceived internal employability as outcomes in Warp-PLS. The direct effects were assessed from the structural model. The study found a significant negative effect of workplace bullying on employee engagement (−0.269**) and employability (−0.312**). So, hypothesis 1 and 2 are accepted.

To test the moderating hypotheses, PROCESS method (Preacher and Hayes ( 2004 , 2008 )) was used as indirect effect can be deducted from it. Bootstrapping procedure was followed with around 5000 samples to give 95% confidence interval (CI) with indirect effect estimates. The codes for moderation analysis were captured from SPSS - Hayes Macro output and graphical representation were created with MS- Excel. Lastly, regarding the moderating hypotheses, H3 and H4, the indirect outcome of workplace bullying on perceived internal employability was significant for OBSE (beta = 0.318**) and on employee engagement was significant for OBSE (beta = 0.468**). The positive moderating role of OBSE is represented in the Figs.  2 and ​ and3. 3 . Further Tables  4 and ​ and5 5 depicts the interaction effect of Work place Bullying on Internal employability and Employee engagement. The direct effect of Bullying on Engagement and Internal Employability in the presence of OBSE as well interaction (moderation effect) effect is evident from the tables.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 10672_2022_9420_Fig2_HTML.jpg

Moderating role of OBSE in Bullying – Engagement

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 10672_2022_9420_Fig3_HTML.jpg

Moderating role of OBSE in Bullying – Employability

Interaction effect of OBSE and bullying on employee engagement

Dependent Variable: Employee engagement

Interaction effect of OBSE and bullying on perceived internal employability

Dependent Variable: Perceived Internal Employability

The purpose of this paper was two-fold. First, to see whether workplace bullying has a detrimental effect on internal employability perceptions and employee engagement. Second, to see whether OBSE has a positive effect on the above-mentioned relationships. We found support for H1 (workplace bullying negatively predicts employee engagement) and H2 (workplace bullying negatively predicts perceived internal employability). The moderating hypothesis put forward was also accepted. That means OBSE moderated the relationship of workplace bullying with employee engagement as well as perceived internal employability. Our study was in response to a call by Park and Ono ( 2017 ) on more representation of reports from the impact of bullying on employees belonging to different cultures and occupations. The support to H1 addresses calls by Park and Ono, 2017  and Rai and Agarwal, 2017 on the under-representation of the effects of workplace bullying in different cultural contexts and also the organization-level outcomes of workplace bullying.

Our findings of the detrimental effect of workplace bullying on engagement and employability are in line with the JD-R theory claiming the negative impact of workplace bullying on work outcomes. The potential explanation of the negative impact of workplace bullying is that bullying could act as a workplace demand that can mitigate the energy and resources of the individual. This drain of resources may lead to a decreased level of engagement within the organization activities as well as perceiving low internal employability. The moderating role of OBSE is very much evident from the regression coefficient and Figs. ​ Figs.2 2 and ​ and3. 3 . For those employees who have high OBSE, even when facing bullying experiences their engagement at work and internal employability seems to be high. This means the adverse effects of bullying are buffered by the high OBSE levels.

Theoretical Implications

The study looks into the impact of workplace bullying on important work outcomes from a multi-theoretic perspective. Major factors that reflect the sustainability of an organization are the internal employability and engagement of its employees. The study is the first among to look into the impact of bullying on employability. The study is significant from a socio-cultural perspective as India has a collectivist culture with high power distance (Hofstede, 1980 ). A negative association was found in lieu of the JD-R model and COR model. Prior research on workplace bullying has not checked the buffering role of OBSE. The most significant theoretical implication of our study comes from the moderating role of OBSE. Organization based self-esteem acts as a source passage that alleviates the negative impacts of bullying in workplace domain. OBSE is an unswerving reflection of the self-perceived value that an individuals have in an organisational enviornment. Employees who perceive high OBSE, perceive themselves as important in the organisation and find meaning in the work they do. This is reflected in their future employment perceptions within the organisation. This will be directly reflected in their behaviours which is in lieu with the policies of the organisation and valued within organization. It is believed that these may result in employees’ deriving intrinsic satisfaction, coupled with reinforcing their self-esteem (Pierce et al., 1989 ).

Practical Implications

The deleterious effects of workplace bullying may reflect on the sustainable growth of organizations. The cues from the employees who perceive bullying shall be seriously taken up by HR managers and supervisors to support them and help them relieve the negative emotions. The study calls for interventions conducted at the organization level that can convey the value system within the organization and restrain individuals from bullying manifestations. It is pertinent to develop a work culture that nurtures creativity as well as employability rather than mitigating them. The study also voices the need to develop a harmonious relationship at work. Such an atmosphere is necessary to ensure employees that their jobs are not at stake. The importance of developing OBSE in an organization is conveyed through the article by looking into the buffering role of OBSE on the negative impacts of workplace bullying. The effects of employer brand image regarding their warmth and competence on employee engagement is influenced by their employee characteristics (e.g., experience and role) (Davies et al., 2018 ). Thus, organizations should provide the teachers with a supportive environment (Gallagher et al., 2021 ) through OBSE to enhance their positive affirmations with their role and experience accumulation, to enhance their brand image and employee engagement.

Limitations and Future Research

Future research could include observer ratings to examine how much they predict incremental variance over and above self-reports, which could be collected at multiple time points. Likewise, a longitudinal research design to attain more knowledge on causal relationships. Cultural differences may exist in academic settings in different countries, so the validation of models in different nations is a possibility. Also, another scope is to capture the difference in outcome on temporary and permanent employees who are subjected to bullying. Various personal and organization level moderators could be considered to buffer the negative impacts of bullying. Further studies also could come up with how bullying impacts external employability and turnover intentions.

In conclusion, our study and model constitute an important step toward understanding the outcomes of workplace bullying. The study also investigated the moderating role of OBSE in the relationship of bullying at the workplace to that of employee engagement, and employability. We found that OBSE positively moderates both the relationships. This research work adds to the research on workplace bullying and organizational outcomes in academia. We also provide implications of our findings for employees in academics.

Declarations

There is no conflict of Interest between the authors.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Change history

The original version of this paper was updated to update the affiliation of the 2nd author to Bharata Mata Institute of Management, Kochi.

Contributor Information

Nimmi P. M., Email: moc.liamg@5891sadnahomimmin .

Geetha Jose, Email: moc.liamg@ahteegesoj .

Maria Tresita Paul Vincent, Email: [email protected] .

Anjali John, Email: moc.liamg@0991nhojilajna .

  • Agarwala T. Bullying and career consequences in the academy: Experiences of women faculty. In: Broadbridge AM, Fielden SL, editors. Research handbook of diversity and careers. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2018. pp. 241–255. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Akkermans, J., Richardson, J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2020). The Covid-19 crisis as a career shock: Implications for careers and vocational behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 119 , 103434. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
  • Albrecht SL, Bakker AB, Gruman JA, Macey WH, Saks AM. Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage: An integrated approach. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2015; 2 :7–35. doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-08-2014-0042. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Allen JA, Rogelberg SG. Manager-led group meetings: A context for promoting employee engagement. Group & Organization Management. 2013; 38 (5):543–569. doi: 10.1177/1059601113503040. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Arshad R, Ismail IR. Workplace incivility and knowledge hiding behavior: Does personality matter? Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2018; 5 :278–288. doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-06-2018-0041. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Arshadi, N., & Damiri, H. (2013). The relationship of job stress with turnover intention and job performance: Moderating role of OBSE. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 84 , 706–710.
  • Bartlett JE, Bartlett ME. Workplace bullying: An integrative literature review. Advances in Developing Human Resources. 2011; 13 :69–84. doi: 10.1177/1523422311410651. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Baruch Y. The development and validation of a measure for protean career orientation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2014; 25 (19):2702–2723. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2014.896389. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Baruch Y, Rousseau DM. Integrating psychological contracts and ecosystems in career studies and management. Academy of Management Annals. 2019; 13 (1):84–111. doi: 10.5465/annals.2016.0103. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Berntson, E. (2008). Employability perceptions: Nature, determinants, and implications for health and well-being (Doctoral dissertation, Psykologiska institutionen).
  • Bozionelos N, Kostopoulos K, Van der Heijden B, Rousseau DM, Bozionelos G, Hoyland T, Miao R, Marzec I, Jędrzejowicz P, Epitropaki O, Mikkelsen A, Scholarios D, Van der Heijde C. Employability and job performance as links in the relationship between mentoring receipt and career success: A study in SMEs. Group & Organization Management. 2016; 41 (2):135–171. doi: 10.1177/1059601115617086. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Cerdin J, Liao Y, Sharma K. The role of temporal focus, dispositional employability, and training on the perceived internal career prospects of talents. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2020; 31 (9):1106–1133. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2019.1711441. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Coetzee M, van Dyk J. Workplace bullying and turnover intention: Exploring work engagement as a potential mediator. Psychological Reports. 2018; 121 :375–392. doi: 10.1177/0033294117725073. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Conway, P. M., Høgh, A., Balducci, C., & Ebbesen, D. K. (2021). Workplace bullying and mental health. Pathways of Job-Related Negative Behaviour , 101–128.
  • Cortellazzo L, Bonesso S, Gerli F, Batista-Foguet JM. Protean career orientation: Behavioral antecedents and employability outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2020; 116 :103343. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103343. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Davies G, Mete M, Whelan S. When employer brand image aids employee satisfaction and engagement. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2018; 5 :64–80. doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-03-2017-0028. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Donald, W. E., Baruch, Y., & Ashleigh, M. (2019). The undergraduate self-perception of employability: Human capital, careers advice, and career ownership. Studies in Higher Education , 44 (4), 599–614.
  • Donald WE, Baruch Y, Ashleigh MJ. Striving for sustainable graduate careers: Conceptualization via career ecosystems and the new psychological contract. Career Development International. 2020; 25 :90–110. doi: 10.1108/CDI-03-2019-0079. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Einarsen S, Hoel H, Notelaers G. Measuring exposure to bullying and harassment at work: Validity, factor structure and psychometric properties of the negative acts questionnaire-revised. Work and Stress. 2009; 23 :24–44. doi: 10.1080/02678370902815673. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Einarsen S, Skogstad A, Rørvik E, Lande ÅB, Nielsen MB. Climate for conflict management, exposure to workplace bullying and work engagement: A moderated mediation analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2018; 29 :549–570. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1164216. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Einarsen, S. V., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (2020). The concept of bullying and harassment at work: The European tradition. In Bullying and harassment in the workplace (pp. 3–53). CRC Press.
  • Gallagher, C. M., Hughes, I. M., & Keith, M. G. (2021). From social burden to support elicitation: Development and validation of a new measure of workplace support elicitation experiences. Journal of Business and Psychology . 10.1007/s10869-021-09769-w
  • Gardner D, O'Driscoll M, Cooper-Thomas HD, Roche M, Bentley T, Catley B, Trenberth L. Predictors of workplace bullying and cyber-bullying in New Zealand. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2016; 13 (5):448. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13050448. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Glambek M, Skogstad A, Einarsen S. Workplace bullying, the development of job insecurity and the role of laissez-faire leadership: A two-wave moderated mediation study. Work & Stress. 2018; 32 (3):297–312. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2018.1427815. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Glavas A. Employee engagement and sustainability: A model for implementing meaningfulness at and in work. Journal of Corporate Citizenship. 2012; 46 :13–29. doi: 10.9774/GLEAF.4700.2012.su.00003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gowan MA. Employability, well-being and job satisfaction following a job loss. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2012; 27 :780–798. doi: 10.1108/02683941211280157. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Groot, W., & Van Den Brink, H. M. (2000). Overeducation in the labor market: a meta-analysis. Economics of Education Review , 19 (2), 149–158.
  • Gupta R. Prevalence of workplace bullying and its impact on workplace well-being in academia. Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing. 2013; 4 :503–505. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gupta P, Gupta U, Wadhwa S. Known and unknown aspects of workplace bullying: A systematic review of recent literature and future research agenda. Human Resource Development Review. 2020; 19 (3):263–308. doi: 10.1177/1534484320936812. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional Process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist , 44 (3), 513. [ PubMed ]
  • Hobfoll SE. Conservation of resources and disaster in cultural context: The caravans and passageways for resources. Psychiatry: Interpersonal & Biological Processes. 2012; 75 (3):227–232. doi: 10.1521/psyc.2012.75.3.227. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hofstede G. Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization. 1980; 10 (4):15–41. doi: 10.1080/00208825.1980.11656300. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hogh, A., Clausen, T., Bickmann, L., Hansen, Å. M., Conway, P. M., & Baernholdt, M. (2021). Consequences of workplace bullying for individuals, organizations and society. Pathways of job-related negative behaviour , 177–200.
  • Hui C, Lee C. Moderating effects of organization-based self-esteem on organizational uncertainty: Employee response relationships. Journal of Management. 2000; 26 (2):215–232. doi: 10.1177/014920630002600203. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Jacobsen DP, Nielsen MB, Einarsen S, Gjerstad J. Negative social acts and pain: Evidence of a workplace bullying and 5-HTT genotype interaction. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. 2018; 44 (3):283–290. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3704. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Joo B-K(B), Bozer G, Ready KJ. A dimensional analysis of psychological empowerment on engagement. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2019; 6 (3):186–203. doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-09-2018-0069. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kahn WA. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal. 1990; 33 (4):692–724. doi: 10.5465/256287. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kirves, K. E. (2014). Perceived employability. Antecedents, trajectories and well-being consequences (Doctoral dissertation). University of Tampere and University of KU Leuven. https://lirias.kuleuven.be/1963479?limo=0 . Accessed 08.05.2021.
  • Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (ijec), 11 (4), 1–10.
  • Krishna, A., & Soumyaja, D. (2020). Playing safe games – thematic analysis of victims’ perspectives on gendered bullying in academia. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research , 12 (4), 197–208. 10.1108/JACPR-03-2020-0478
  • Law R, Dollard MF, Tuckey MR, Dormann C. Psychosocial safety climate as a lead indicator of workplace bullying and harassment, job resources, psychological health and employee engagement. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2011; 43 (5):1782–1793. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.04.010. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Leymann H. Mobbing and psychological terror at workplaces. Violence and Victims. 1990; 5 :119–126. doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.5.2.119. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Macey WH, Schneider B. The Meaning of Employee Engagement. 2008; 1 :3–30. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mao C, Chang CH, Johnson RE, Sun J. Incivility and employee performance, citizenship, and counterproductive behaviors: Implications of the social context. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 2019; 24 (2):213. doi: 10.1037/ocp0000108. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • May DR, Gilson RL, Harter LM. The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004; 77 (1):11–37. doi: 10.1348/096317904322915892. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Meires, J. (2018). The essentials: Using emotional intelligence to curtail bullying in the workplace. Urologic Nursing , 38 (3), 150–154.
  • Meriläinen M, Kõiv K, Honkanen A. Bullying effects on performance and engagement among academics. Employee Relations. 2019; 41 (6):1205–1223. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Muazzam A, Anjum A, Visvizi A. Problem-focused coping strategies, workplace bullying, and sustainability of HEIs. Sustainability. 2020; 12 :10565. doi: 10.3390/su122410565. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nazir O, Islam JU. Enhancing organizational commitment and employee performance through employee engagement: An empirical check. South Asian Journal of Business Studies. 2017; 6 (1):98–114. doi: 10.1108/SAJBS-04-2016-0036. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nguyen DT, Teo ST, Grover SL, Nguyen NP. Respect, bullying, and public sector work outcomes in Vietnam. Public Management Review. 2019; 21 (6):863–889. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2018.1538426. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nielsen MB, Einarsen S. Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: A meta-analytic review. Work & Stress. 2012; 26 (4):309–332. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2012.734709. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nimmi PM, Zakkariya KA, Nezrin R. Insight to impact: The effect of protean career attitude on employability perceptions of IT professionals. Colombo Business Journal. 2020; 11 (1):1–23. doi: 10.4038/cbj.v11i1.55. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nimmi, P.M., Binoy, A.K., Joseph, G. & Suma, R. (2021). Significance of developing spirituality among management students: Discerning the impact on psychological resources and wellbeing. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education . Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. 10.1108/JARHE-10-2020-0372.
  • Park JH, Ono M. Effects of workplace bullying on work engagement and health: The mediating role of job insecurity. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2017; 28 (22):3202–3225. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1155164. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Paul V MT, Devi NU. Psychological capital, outcome expectation and job performance: A mediated model of innovative work behavior. International Journal for Research in Engineering Application & Management. 2018; 1 :52–60. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Paul V MT, Devi NU. Family incivility and entrepreneurial success of MSMEs: Moderating role of psychological capital. South Asian Journal of Marketing and Management Research. 2020; 10 :35–45. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of the organization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management , 30 (5), 591–622.
  • Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization-based self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal , 32 (3), 622–648.
  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers , 36 (4), 717–731. [ PubMed ]
  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods , 40 (3), 879–891. [ PubMed ]
  • Rai A, Agarwal UA. Linking workplace bullying and work engagement: The mediating role of psychological contract violation. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management. 2017; 4 (1):42–71. doi: 10.1177/2322093717704732. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rogers KM, Ashforth BE. Respect in organizations: Feeling valued as "we" and "me". Journal of Management. 2017; 43 (5):1578–1608. doi: 10.1177/0149206314557159. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rothwell A, Arnold J. Self-perceived employability: Development and validation of a scale. Personnel Review. 2007; 36 (5):23–41. doi: 10.1108/00483480710716704. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Saks AM. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement revisited. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2019; 6 (1):19–38. doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-06-2018-0034. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sánchez-Manjavacas A, Saorín-Iborra M, Willoughby M. Internal employability as a strategy for key employee retention. Innovar. 2014; 24 (53):7–22. doi: 10.15446/innovar.v24n53.43771. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sarwar A, Naseer S, Zhong JY. Effects of bullying on job insecurity and deviant behaviors in nurses: Roles of resilience and support. Journal of Nursing Management. 2020; 28 (2):267–276. doi: 10.1111/jonm.12917. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 66 (4), 701–716.
  • Serban, A., Rubenstein, A. L., Bosco, F. A., Reina, C. S., & Grubb, L. K. (2022). Stressors and social resources at work: Examining the buffering effects of LMX, POS, and their interaction on employee attitudes.  Journal of Business and Psychology , 37 (4), 717–734.
  • Shuck B, Osam K, Zigarmi D, Nimon K. Definitional and conceptual muddling: Identifying the positionality of employee engagement and defining the construct. Human Resource Development Review. 2017; 16 (3):263–293. doi: 10.1177/1534484317720622. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Tesi A. (2021), Moving forward to social workers' work engagement: Framing the regulatory modes and the job demands-resources model, Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health . 10.1080/15555240.2021.1931260.
  • Trépanier SG, Fernet C, Austin S. Workplace bullying and psychological health at work: The mediating role of satisfaction of needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness. Work & Stress. 2013; 27 (2):123–140. doi: 10.1080/02678373.2013.782158. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Tuckey MR, Li Y, Chen PY. The role of transformational leadership in workplace bullying: Interactions with leaders' and followers' job characteristics in a multi-level study. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2017; 4 (3):199–217. doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-01-2017-0008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Vanhercke D, De Cuyper N, Peeters E, De Witte H. Defining perceived employability: A psychological approach. Personnel Review. 2014; 43 (4):592–605. doi: 10.1108/PR-07-2012-0110. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Verkuil, B., Atasayi, S., & Molendijk, M. L. (2015). Workplace bullying and mental health: a meta-analysis on cross-sectional and longitudinal data. PloS One , 10 (8), e0135225. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
  • Xanthopoulou D, Bakker AB, Demerouti E, Schaufeli WB. The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management. 2007; 14 (2):121. doi: 10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Zayed M, Jauhar J, Mohaidin Z, Murshid MA. Effects of inter-organizational justice on dimensions of organizational citizenship Behaviours: A study on Kuwait ministries’ employees. Management and Labour Studies. 2020; 45 (4):444–470. doi: 10.1177/0258042X20939026. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

COMMENTS

  1. How Bullying Manifests at Work

    November 04, 2022 master1305/Getty Images Summary. The term workplace bullying describes a wide range of behaviors, and this complexity makes addressing it difficult and often ineffective. For...

  2. Workplace bullying as an organizational problem: Spotlight on people

    First, through of 342 official complaints lodged with a state health and safety regulator (over 5,500 pages), we discovered that the risk of bullying primarily arises from ineffective people management in 11 different contexts (e.g., managing underperformance, coordinating working hours, and entitlements).

  3. Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace

    Bullying has been identified as one of the leading workplace stressors, with adverse consequences for the individual employee, groups of employees, and whole organisations. Employees who have been bullied have lower levels of job satisfaction, higher levels of anxiety and depression, and are more likely to leave their place of work.

  4. Workplace Bullying, Anxiety, and Job Performance: Choosing Between

    We use hierarchical linear regression to test our research hypotheses. As shown in Table 3, workplace bullying has a significant positive impact on state anxiety (β = 0.470, p < 0.001). Hypothesis 1 is supported. The interaction items of workplace bullying and trait anxiety have a significant negative impact on state anxiety (β = −0.168, p ...

  5. Workplace Bullying: A Tale of Adverse Consequences

    According to the findings of 12 studies, being bullied in the workplace affects approximately 11 percent of workers. Victims are frequently blue-collar and unskilled workers. However, there also appear to be gender and milieu/management factors.

  6. 20 Years of workplace bullying research: A review of the antecedents

    Workplace bullying research has grown significantly over the past 20 Keywords Workplace bullying Bullying review Bullying antecedents Bullying consequences Mobbing Workplace aggression 1. Introduction Over the past two decades, workplace bullying has emerged as an important area of research in management studies.

  7. PDF Workplace Bullying as an Organizational Problem: Spotlight on People

    Workplace bullying is a form of systematic mistreatment that occurs repeatedly and regularly over time, whereby the target has ... The extensive body of research on workplace bullying antece-dents illustrates thatbullying is largely influenced by work environ-ment factors such as job characteristics (e.g., job demands, job ...

  8. Full article: What we need to know about workplace bullying

    Outcomes of bullying include physical health problems, depression, posttraumatic stress, burnout, and strain in general (Boudrias et al., Citation 2021; Nielsen & Einarsen, Citation 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.

  9. Upwards Workplace Bullying: A Literature Review

    This article tracks the history, research, and literature of upwards bullying in the workplace, where employees use calculated tactics against the directors, managers, supervisors, and leaders to whom the subordinates are accountable. While there is a huge body of literature on all aspects of workplace bullying, finding relevant publications on ...

  10. What influences the relationship between workplace bullying and

    What influences the relationship between workplace bullying and employee well-being? A systematic review of moderators Samuel Farley , Daniella Mokhtar , Kara Ng & Karen Niven Pages 345-372 | Received 01 Oct 2021, Accepted 15 Jan 2023, Published online: 23 Jan 2023 Cite this article https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2023.2169968 In this article

  11. Upwards Workplace Bullying: A Literature Review

    Original Research Workplace bullying is an international plight that tran-scends geographic and cultural boundaries. Its pervasive-ness in all environments is reflected in the research literature that documents the problem in both the private and public

  12. Workplace Bullying

    Workplace Bullying May Be Linked to Long-Term Health Issues. A new study links workplace bullying to negative health outcomes for employees, including increases in long-term sick leave and prescriptions for antidepressants. Learn what researchers have discovered about the factors that lead to bullying and the long-term consequences it can have.

  13. About a third of employees have faced bullying at work

    Manipulation and provocation also play a role in bullying dynamics, and cyberbullying has emerged as a new form of workplace harassment. Research suggests the impacts of workplace bullying affect ...

  14. 20 years of workplace bullying research: A review of the antecedents

    Research on workplace bullying, which has just recently passed the 20 year mark, has grown significantly over this duration of time. We provide an extensive review of the extant literature, with a focus on the antecedents and consequences of workplace bullying. We organize our review of the extant literature by level of analysis, which allows us to understand workplace bullying from each major ...

  15. Standing up against workplace bullying behavior: Recommendations from

    Workplace bullying (WB) in healthcare remains a persistent problem, particularly against newly licensed nurses. ... This research study was funded by contract No. 211-2016-M-90432 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (CDC-NIOSH). The findings and conclusions in this report are ...

  16. (PDF) Workplace Bullying: A Review and Future Research Directions

    Workplace bullying is a heavily researched topic in management research and is well examined in terms of its prevalence, antecedents, and outcomes. The other aspects of the bullying...

  17. Workplace Bullying: Signs, Effects, and How to Cope

    Workplace bullying hurts the health and well-being of employees. It can also damage workplace productivity and performance. "Bullying's pernicious nature creates long-lasting scars that have an effect on the victim's sense of self-worth, self-assurance, and general mental health," says Azizi Marshall, LCPC, a licensed clinical professional counselor and founder of the Mental Health at Work ...

  18. Qualitative Research Methods in the Study of Workplace Bullying

    1 Citations Part of the Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment book series (HWBEAH,volume 1) Abstract Qualitative research methods have been used for over 20 years to explore and illuminate workplace bullying, emotional abuse and harassment.

  19. How to Identify and Manage Workplace Bullying

    According to 2017 research from the Workplace Bullying Institute: About 70 percent of bullies are male, and about 30 percent are female. Both male and female bullies are more likely to target women.

  20. Research

    Research by WBI 2017 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey 2017 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey 1 file (s) 7.41 MB Download 2014 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey 2014 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey 1 file (s) 2.54 MB Download 2010 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey 2010 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey 1 file (s) 273.19 KB Download

  21. (PDF) Workplace Bullying Model: a Qualitative Study on Bullying in

    ... Both vertical and lateral bullying have been perpetrated against CRAs with the highest perpetrators attributed to senior colleagues. This is quite different from a study conducted in USA...

  22. Prevalence, Antecedents, and Consequences of Workplace Bullying among

    Despite over 25 years of extensive research about the workplace bullying phenomenon in various disciplines, there have been mixed conclusions about its prevalence, antecedents, and consequences among nurses reported by multiple systematic reviews.

  23. Workplace bullying: Signs and how to cope

    Workplace bullying is the repeated, deliberate mistreatment of a person at work. This may involve hostile, intimidating, or offensive behavior. A person may experience workplace bullying from a ...

  24. The psychological abuse of workplace bullying

    According to a 2021 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute, approximately 48 million Americans say they've been bullied at work. (The WBI defines bullying as a "non-physical form of ...

  25. Being Bullied in Childhood More Than Triples Risk of Mental Health

    Researchers believe the study is the first to probe the link between peer bullying, interpersonal distrust and development of mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, hyperactivity and ...

  26. Study finds childhood bullying linked to distrust and mental health

    The findings could help schools and other institutions to develop new evidence-based interventions to counter the negative mental health impacts of bullying, according to the s tudy's senior author Dr. George Slavich, who directs UCLA Health's Laboratory for Stress Assessment and Research.

  27. Workplace Bullying, Engagement and Employability: Moderating Role of

    The present research paper aims to examine the influence of workplace bullying on employee work outcomes in terms of employee engagement and perceived internal employability. The paper also analyses the moderating role of organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) in the relationship between workplace bullying and employee work outcomes.