Workplace Bullying in Higher Education: An Overview
Transcript of Workplace Bullying in Higher Education: An Overview
ACADEMIA WORKPLACE BULLYING; AN OVERVIEW
By Bridget DeFalco & Dr. Peter Crabb
Pennsylvania State UniversityHazelton
Definition of Workplace Bullying
Workplace bullying is defined as workplace interaction consisting of any combination of harassment, discrimination, social exclusion, public and professional humiliation, criticism, intimidation, psychological, and sometimes physical abuse that occurs repeatedly and over a period of at least six months
Who Is Targeted Colleagues
Usually those whose skills, ethics, and independence are found to be threatening
Students Administrators New Hires Untenured Tenured Both Genders
Who Perpetrates Administrators Colleagues
Sense of Inadequacy Students
Contrapower Harassment Both Genders
Females more likely to engage in same-sex bullying
People With Power Over Others
Methods of Bullying Incivility Disregarding Your Concerns Ignoring Contributions Intimidation Rumors Subtle Sexism and Racism Undermining Authority Humiliation in Presence of Colleagues Shouting Subordinate Style (Student to Faculty and Bottom-Up)
Methods of Bullying (Cont’d) Belittlement Eye Rolling Unwarranted/Unprofessional Remarks Ostracizing Withholding Information Assigned Unreasonable Workload Excessive Monitoring Exclusion from Relative Meetings
“Mobbing” in Academia Definition: Form of Organizational Pathology in which coworkers gang up and engage in ongoing rituals of humiliation, exclusion, unjustified accusations, emotional abuse, and general harassment in their malicious attempt to force a targeted worker out of their workplace.
The Term Originates from the similarities to Bird’s Mobbing Activities
Methods of Mobbing Attack on Target Self-Expression Attack on Target Social Relations Attack on Target Reputation Attack on Target Professional Life Attack on Physical & Mental Health of Target
Phases of Mobbing
PHASE I: Critical Incident Target accused of unacceptable behavior Accusation gives mobbers justification to take administrative actions whether accusation is real or perceived
PHASE II: Mobbing & Stigmatizing Aggressive acts and psychological assaults against target
More people have co-opted into mobbing process
Target has been instilled with terror and fear
Phases of Mobbing (Cont’d)
PHASE III: Personnel Management Administration seriously enters into the mobbing usually after having ignored or minimalized the problem
Target is blamed for problem Institution creates explanations based on personal characteristics rather than environmental factors
Phases of Mobbing (Cont’d)
PHASE IV: Incorrect Diagnosis Administration allies with mobbers Target is constructed as “Difficult, Under Extreme Stress, or Mentally Ill”
If Target seeks psychological help, Target risks being labeled with incorrect diagnosis such as “Paranoia, Adjustment Disorder, or Character Disorder”
PHASE V: Expulsion Target forced out of organization by dismissal or resignation
Mobbing process continues to justify actions taken
Targets of Mobbing The Targets of Mobbing Generally Honest,
Successful, and Loyal to Organization Professors with Many Publications High Salaries High Evaluation Scores Foreign Born Speak with Accent Mobbing Targets Frequently Wish to Leave
Jobs, But Many Stay due to Pursuit of Tenure or Because They are Tenured
Where or How Bullying Occurs in Academia
Through Email Reported as Most Severe Form of Bullying
One-on-one Confrontation No Witnesses
In Meetings In Classrooms
Underlying Causes Organizational Culture Being “Foreign-Born” Difference from Majority in Sex, Sexual Orientation, or Credentials
Belonging to a Discipline with Ambiguous Standards
Working Under a Punitive Administrator
Member of Financially Strained Academic Unit
Underlying Causes (Cont’d) Power Games Paranoia Manipulative Approach to Management Misdirected Politics Opportunism Mirrored Behavior (Target becomes Bully)
Management Ignores or Misinterprets Problem
Tenure (or hope of achieving tenure) Extends Length of Time Employees Tolerate Bullying
Methods of Bullying by Students(Contrapower Harassment)
Sleeping in Class (78.3%) Request for Easier Assignments/Exams (76.1%)
Engaged in Non-Class Activity During Class (71.3%)
Continuous Interruptions During Class (67.5%)
Showed Disdain (65.7%) Answered or Talked on Cell Phone (61.3%)
Verbally Disrespected or Challenged Authority (60.7%)
Consequences of Bullying in Academia
Interfere with Job Performance Create Hostile Work Environment Increased Employee Turnover Negative Perception of University Reduced Employee Engagement Impact on Health and Welfare of Employee
Stress Frustration Anger Demoralization Powerlessness Lowered Self Esteem
Consequences of Bullying in Academia (Cont’d)
Increase of Time Wasted Need to talk with colleague repeatedly
Behaviors Learned and Values Learned at University Carried by Students into Workplace
Legal Issues Governmental Legislation Required
Consequences of Mobbing Damage to Target is an Injury
Workplace Safety and Health Issue In Extreme Cases, Can Lead to Suicide
Lack of Commitment to Staff Higher Absenteeism Bystanders More Likely to Join Mobbers than Show Compassion toward Target
Suggested Remedies Implement Policies on Workplace Behavior Specify What Constitutes Bullying (Harassment)
Process for Dealing With Bullying Cases Consequences for Frivolous Claims
Educational Program for Faculty, Administrators, and Staff
Prohibit Harassing Communication Between Faculty
Effective Counseling Intervention at All Levels
Suggested Remedies (Cont’d)
Early Management Intervention Focus on Situation, Not the People Employee Commitment to Stop Bullying
Conclusion Academic Bullying is a Type of Psychological Bullying that Predominantly Occurs at Colleges and Universities.
Academic Bullying Will Not Stop until Colleagues and Administrators Actively Say “NO” to Bullying Behaviors
References Cassell, M.A. Bullying in Academe: prevalent,
significant, and incessant. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4. 33-44.
Fogg, P. (2008). Academic bullies. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55. B10-B13.
Giorgi, G. (2012). Workplace bullying in academia creates a negative work environment. An Italian study. Employee Responsibility and Rights, 24. 261-275.
Gravios, J. (2006). Mob rule. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 52. A10-A12.
Keashly, L. & Neuman, J.H. (2010). Faculty experiences with bullying in higher education. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 32. 48-70. doi: 10.2753/ATP1084-1806321103
Keim, J., & McDermott, J.C. (2010). Mobbing: workplace violence in the academy. The Educational Forum, 74. 167-173. doi: 10.1080/00131721003608505
Khoo, S.B. (2010). Academic mobbing: hidden health hazard at workplace. Malaysian Family Physician, 5. 61-67.
References (Cont’d) Lampman, C., Phelps, A., Bancroft, S. & Beneke, M. (2009).
Contrapower harrassment in Academia: a survey of faculty experience with student incivility, bullying, and sexual
attention. Sex Roles, 60. 331-346. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-`9560-x
Leymann, H. (1990). Mobbing and psychological terror at workplaces. Violence and Victims, 5. 119-129.
McKay, R., Arnold, D.H., Fratzl, J., & Thomas, R. (2008). Workplace bullying in academia, a Canadian study. Employee Responsibility and Rights Journal, 20, 77-100. doi: 10.1007/s10672-008-9073-3
Raineri, E.M, Frear, D.F., & Edmonds, J.J. (2011). An examination of the academic reach of faculty and administrator bullying. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2. 22-35.
Tigrel, E.Y., & Kokalan, O. (2009). Academic Mobbing in Turkey. Work Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 55, 963-970.
Zabrodske, K. & Kveton, P. (2013). Prevalence and forms of bullying among university employees. Employee Responsibility and Rights Journal, 25. 89-108. doi: 10.1007/s10672-012-9210-x