Neil Crawford Tavistock Clinic, London, UK
Keywords: Bullying, Intervention, Language, Work psychology
Type of Article: Theoretical with application in practice
Bullying behaviour has always been part of the human condition. On a global level we have witnessed fairly overt domination even recently. Its visibility level is not so obvious in current workplace practices but its existence is in no doubt. More subtle, less detectable actions and behaviours are employed by the bully and the emergence of e-mail's flame mail and spamming techniques in the workplace demonstrate this point. Bullying in the workplace is psychological violence. Two cases of bullying interventions are compared in this paper. Noticeably both organisations had detailed employment policies, personnel departments and occupational health departments. Their ability to manage bullying, however, was determined by their organisational culture, in part, through a Dignity at Work programme. Bullying is identified as immoral, as theft, and as a misuse of loyalty. The paper concludes by calling on the different disciplines involved in the analysis of this topic to collaborate and acknowledge plurality of perspective.
Content Indicators: Readability**, Practice Implications**, Originality**, Research Implications**
Introduction
Bullying behaviour has been with us for all time. The word bully though has had different usage and various meanings over time. Shakespeare's Pistol in Henry V demonstrates its use as an expression of approval and affection:
The king's a bawcock and a heart of gold, A lad of life, an imp of fame, Of parents good, of fist most valiant: I kiss his dirty shoe, and from my heart-string I love the lovely bully.
It possibly derives from the middle Dutch word broeder , meaning brother. Roosevelt was known for his joyous and explosive exclamation "bully" which he said when he particularly enjoyed himself. Bully was used in the eighteenth century to describe a pimp or villain, perhaps an early link between the word bully and the male exploiting the female. In the First World War bully beef was the staple diet of the troops on the front. It derives from the French word bouille , tinned boiled beef. The usage of the word bull, not cow, has associated bullying as predominantly male behaviour, even though there is much evidence of bullying by women.
One sometimes uses the expression "bully for you" to describe an action as first rate or to congratulate someone. In hockey, "bullying off" is used to describe an aggressive contest between two people: the stronger or more skilled wins. Moreover, history is littered with instances of bullying behaviour: by ruling minorities, of religious minorities and in the workplace. In the elections for the first Kansas territorial legislature in March 1855, on Election Day, several thousand men known as border Ruffians, crossed into Kansas from Missouri, stuffing ballot boxes, bullying voters, and intimidating judges.
Understanding the emergence of workplace bullying
Let us consider why our time lends itself to looking at bullying at work. The pioneering work of John Bowlby (1944) for example in "Forty-four juvenile thieves" examined aggressive and traumatised children who had been separated from their families during the Second World War. In the last 50 years, we have become aware through psychology of what often lies behind disturbed behaviour in children and adolescence - truancy, bullying and stealing to name but a few.
We have also seen systematic attempts to understand the behaviour of individuals and groups (Crawford, 1987). The psychological study of issues below the surface in organisations has become prominent in the last 60 years, not least at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Tavistock Institute of Human Relation. In itself, this may reflect the slow humanisation of the human animal from a more primitive state. For example, whipping people, including children and criminals, is no longer a feature in this culture, but is still alive in other cultures.
Consider the statement "everything changes but everything stays the same". One hypothesis for the current interest in workplace bullying is that as certain overtly aggressive behaviour becomes more unacceptable in a culture, the manifestations of aggression are transformed from observable behaviour to more subtle, less detectable, actions. Researchers in this field identify how psychological behaviour evolves and adapts in our species. Another possibility is that bullying has always existed - what is new is the study of the phenomenon. A simple example of adaptation can been seen in communications between computer users. Flame mail, bullying by e-mail, "spamming" (i.e. persistently sending unwanted e-mails), and "cyberstalking", (i.e. using e-mail to stalk individuals over the Internet), are now beginning to be recognised and studied by the computer industry (Novell, 1997; 1998). To combat the misuse of inter- and intra-organisational communications, some companies are developing and implementing policies to address the problem.
International bullying and the identification of provocation in organisations
International bullying is a common phenomenon. The recent threat of aggression through the detonation of nuclear bombs by India and Pakistan was both a demonstration of machismo and an attempt by each nation to show their capacity to both attack another and defend themselves. We have seen international bullying on many previous occasions, for example between the USA and Cuba, or between China and Hong Kong. Each example is complicated with its own history and stirs international debate over who provoked whom and what the appropriate response should be.
Bullying in organisations is also an aggressive act. Yet the studies and statistics on bullying rarely reflect the unique history and factors in each case. While many instances of bullying are cut and dried, many more could be described by the notion of the bullying as an equation with factors on both sides. The political incorrectness of suggesting that bullying is sometimes provoked can bolster the oversimplification of the bullying scenario into good and bad which is easily intelligible to all. The notion that some people, consciously or unconsciously, seek opportunities to be bullied is distasteful to many. Yet guilt, or a sense of worthlessness can motivate an individual to consciously or unconsciously set up situations in which they will be attacked. From their perspective they may not feel that they have contributed in any way to the bullying.
My experience suggests that workplace bullying is taken far more seriously if assessed on a case by case basis, being sceptical at times, each scenario having a host of interwoven factors (Adams and Crawford, 1992). It suggests that our increased exposure to the prevalence of workplace bullying does not make us seek it everywhere, in every organisation. If one accepts that bullying is essentially an aggressive act and an aspect of violence, then the study of bullying, because it is an examination of psychological violence, is important. Although the marks cannot be seen in the way we find lacerations on the flesh from a beating, this does not lessen its seriousness.
In one organisation, 360-degree assessments provided indicators of bullying. Customer satisfaction is so highly prized that management is always asking for feedback from subordinates about their performance. Consistently they receive very high ratings, which gives the illusion all is well. The backdrop of fear is so great that the employees do not dare say anything other than all is well, except in private. A process that is lauded as moving towards more accountability is overshadowed by the culture in which it is undertaken. It begs questions as to the prevalence of importing techniques and organisational solutions into existing cultures, which like chameleons just take on the colour of the organisational culture.
Two interventions
Intervention one
In the UK, Littlewoods (1998), (the Pools, mail order and retailing organisation) has developed award-winning policies under the title of "Dignity at Work". With their permission, their recently updated policy is discussed below. When they initiated the policy, bullying was only mentioned in passing. They subsequently found that many of the problems that presented themselves in the workplace were better described as bullying. To their credit, they wanted to make workplace bullying more central and explicit when they undertook a major revamping of their policies. To this end, the organisation and consultant devised a comprehensive section on bullying at work. The dedicated unit responsible for developing Dignity at Work is situated at head office - not shoved out of the way. The consultation process with different parts of the business was time consuming and thorough. It gives important signals to the 30,000 staff concerning their welfare and the priority given to human relations; and importantly, what happens when relationships go awry. The consultation process itself was potent. It meant that regional, cultural and organisational differences could be taken into consideration because implementation required commitment to the policies and procedures at the highest levels. It taught me that during the consultation period, the level of alertness and sensitivity to workplace bullying was never higher.
Written guides were produced for managers, investigators and supporters. Promoting Employees Dignity at Work , the policy title, is freely available to all staff. A central support structure has been created to help those members of Littlewood's staff to undertake their clearly defined roles.
It is not perfect and can never be, for in practice all policies and procedures have pitfalls. Words and written guidelines can present a veneer of responsibility that stops nothing; but the law recognises the prescience of good policies. This author is constantly struggling with the question of what constitutes an effective intervention where human relations are concerned. I am now inclined to believe that managing human relations, including bullying, is not a soft issue. It is such a hard issue that many organisations fail to grasp how to handle their internal conflicts.
Intervention two
Another type of intervention is now illustrated. The organisation is not named due to confidentiality requirements. Briefly, a female head of a division systematically bullied about 20 staff, many of whom left, over a period of years. A new deputy head of the organisation, on hearing first hand about the events, decided to address the matter. The employees who had been bullied were given the opportunity to request a limited number of consultations with this author on a confidential basis. Additionally, the author consulted with senior management about dealing with the organisational issues that arose. Consultations with the alleged bully were also organised.
Several features in this scenario were prominent. Initially the deputy director and a senior member of personnel were isolated by other members of the organisation, who refused to believe bullying existed and wanted to distance themselves from the problem. To the staff of the division, this new deputy director gave hope that a tyranny might end. No senior manager until then had taken their concerns seriously. Among the bully's specialities was singling out individuals for criticism who were having difficulties in their lives; such as a miscarriage, a bereavement, an ill child, or a home relocation. The consequences were that nobody told her or her staff of any personal difficulties. They were relieved when someone else was singled out for such systematic "persecution".
This situation was an embarrassment to the organisation as it feared publicity - not for fear of damage to its image - but for fear it would open up a flood of internal complaints of bullying.
With the support of the director, the personnel manager and deputy director stood firm while statements were taken and the bully was told that a formal investigation was taking place. During this process, the bully displayed such deviousness that she managed to undermine her own credibility and categorical denials of allegations of bullying. She contacted potential witnesses, and discussed the situation with her colleagues and outsiders, contrary to the strict confidentiality of the proceedings. She made unfounded allegations to the director about the new deputy director. The bully also presented sick leave notes for stress and depression alleging ill health as the consequence of the action taken. Yet, at the same time, she was attending conferences where colleagues she had bullied were present. Senior management realised that she should never be allowed to return to the organisation.
If one thinks that the individual was labelled as a bully prematurely, consider two of the many pieces of evidence. First, every individual who came to see the author, male or female, without exception, broke down and cried in our first meeting. Remember they were not sent to me, but came of their own volition. Second, the people who were interviewed were mainly well-balanced, bright individuals, with no history of being bullied. Each had long service in their specialities and within this organisation.
Intervention conundrums
Here is the conundrum. In the two organisational examples given, both organisations have detailed employment policies. They also have personnel and occupational health departments. One organisation believed that bullying did not really exist, the other realised that bullying cases were presenting as harassment or under other guises.
Some individuals can appear to tolerate bullying, adapting to the organisational climate, however miserable they feel. It is striking how frequently bright, able people have wondered why they have allowed themselves to be bullied for long periods without adequately addressing the problem. One way of understanding this phenomenon is to appreciate the way in which tyrants operate. They depend on people giving up; feeling so demoralised that they cannot be bothered to fight. In the cycle of demoralisation, the doubts about oneself, one's motives, what course of action to take, undermines confidence. This plays into the tyrant's hands. They rely on the victim feeling that it is not worth bothering to take any action. This erosive, corrosive process can undermine individuals while they are in the organisation and after they have left; its legacy living on sometimes for years.
Stealing and robbery as an aspect of workplace bullying
The theme of stealing and robbery is widespread and interesting to study. The origin of the wish to steal is immensely complicated and beyond the scope of this paper. This discussion will touch on theft and fear as symbols.
The fear of being robbed
"I have been robbed". Organisations often present issues around this theme and concerns about "things that are mine being stolen from me". Sigourney Weaver, in the film Working Girl , proposes an idea for a deal, which she steals from Melanie Griffiths and makes her own. In the film, Weaver's villainy is eventually discovered, Melanie gets her man, Harrison Ford, and receives her due credit and major promotion. True life is marginally different. The cream may rise to the top on occasions but so does the dirt - "I do this job for them and they use me and receive the credit for themselves". What belongs to the person is stolen, often subtly, frequently blatantly - ideas, possibilities for promotion, opportunities for projects - a quiet word perhaps, unseen to someone but nevertheless deadly. Some stealing, it is suggested, is a type of bullying. Its aggressive nature leaves the person feeling vulnerable and invaded, just as if one has been actually robbed.
Loyalty and dependency
Many organisations work hard to gain the loyalty and commitment of their staff. Commitment to the aims of the organisation is seen as a goal to be achieved. However, it is all too easy to misuse one's power and to exploit the loyalty of one's staff and their desire to commit to an enterprise. In organisations where loyalty is synonymous with discipline and obeying orders, the possibilities for bullying are limitless. The responsible manager keeps in mind that loyalties are very complicated.
Organisational consultations frequently reveal the exploitation of individuals who are excited by a profession or the "buzz" of working for an important organisation or person. For those who are ambitious, part of their salary is the privilege and kudos of working for that organisation. This type of exploitation is so endemic it is unquestioned. This organisational scenario is also a breeding ground for bullying. Many people need encouragement, affirmation and a superior's praise.
Many workers are not loyal to their organisations but depend on this workplace for their livelihood. The ruthless manager knows this and may have no compunction in misusing that dependency by using and abusing individuals. Loyalty then and dependency can be a backdrop to workplace bullying. Fostering loyalty to the organisation can only flourish if entrustment of your allegiance is equally important.
Antagonism and rivalry in the field of workplace bullying
While many people's lives are touched by association with bullying, there are groups of individuals who are involved in this field professionally - the counsellors, theorists, specialists, legal advisors, union representatives, pressure groups, and the consultants.
Status, rivalry, enmities and alliances have seemed to bubble up recently. It is endemic in most fields and professions and it is presented here crudely. The academics see themselves as top of the greasy pole. Their studies, they feel, are based on a scientific approach, real data, theoretical positions based upon tried and tested methodologies. Information gathered through other avenues is interesting but of a lesser status, anecdotal, glorified gossip. Then there are those people who deal directly with individuals who have been bullied and their organisations. They see themselves as top of the tree. They get their hands dirty and are directly in the fray. They are committed to a cause helping people in distressing, sometimes tragic circumstances. Perhaps they work in this field full-time. There are also countless numbers of people whose work is unseen, unglamorous who deal with the bullying scenario as part of their job. They have always dealt with it in personnel, for example; it is nothing special, what is the fuss about?
There are other measures, false or otherwise, jostling around the minds and thoughts of groups and individuals. One competition centres on "Who cares the most?" Who's been longest in the field or has to their mind the most experience? Consider also the legal profession whose landmark cases influence the decisions of other lawyers and organisational structures. Their attention to wording and law leads to the belief that theirs is the "important view". Union representatives who work on behalf of large numbers of groups devoting part of their lives to the rights, protection and well-being of all employees. To say nothing of the organisations themselves who have ultimate responsibility for human relations. Open or subtle divisions are taking place between groups in which being better takes precedence over the value of different contributions. How should one assess the contributions of different approaches? In a funny way a loose institution or association exists which has its quarrels and divisions like any grouping. Ambitions, personal and political, for influence and recognition built on the back of workplace bullying. And why not if it is up-front!
One may wish to argue that this is a cynical, tainted view of the whole business, unrepresentative of a person's experience. In fact it only represents a particular angle from which to look and there are other perspectives. For example, one may feel unjustly besmirched, for what everyone brings is their distinctive competence; be it their professional background or their capacity for humanity. The academics bring their research methods, which throw light upon this field, give it credibility and identify some of its complexities. Their community draws upon each other to navigate their way through the Bermuda Triangle of bullying into which a thousand people drown never to be seen again. The campaigns and pressure groups attempt to mobilise their clout, energy and knowledge to influence lawmakers and the political climate of organisations and the wider community. To say nothing of individuals who connect with and ease the pain of those in terrible predicaments. This includes organisations uncertain how best to approach this area looking to be given or to take a lead. Each makes a contribution to a major problem including critics and cynics who argue that workplace bullying does not exist. They can sharpen thinking, make us re-examine evidence and our basic assumptions. It is a reminder how aggression is so often denied with a vengeance. How as we know, the messenger gets shot first.
These two contrasting views attempt to describe the international matrix in which the study of workplace bullying is growing up. Its study is perhaps past its infancy, and into early adolescence.
References
Adams, A. and Crawford, N. (1992), Bullying at Work , Virago, London .
Bowlby, J. (1944), "Forty-four juvenile thieves: their characters and home life", International Journal of Psychoanalysis , Vol. 25, pp. 19-52; 107-27.
Crawford, N. (1987), On Groups , Tavistock Clinic Paper No.63, Tavistock, London
Littlewoods (1998), Promoting Employees' Dignity at Work , Littlewoods .
Novell, U.K. (1997), Shaming, Blaming and Flaming: Corporate Miscommunications in the Digital Age , Novell .
Novell, U.K. (1998), A Spammer in the Works , Novell .
