Adult bullying at work is a unique type of escalated, entrenched conflict that occurs between and among organizational members.
Nearly half of all U.S. workers are affected by bullying during their working lives, either being targeted or witnessing abuse as a bystander. The power disparity between bullies and targets, the aggressive character of bullying communication, and the persistent wearing down that occurs mark adult bullying as a unique type of escalated, destructive workplace conflict.
Adult bullying at work is not, however, simply a dyadic one-on-one conflict—many others are involved and affected. Bullying conflicts are also extremely difficult to resolve, and the targets’ tactics (especially problem solving) rarely resolve the conflict and often make it worse.We tell a thrice-told tale of bullying conflicts from three standpoints: targets, bystanders, and bullies. To illustrate the tale, we include a case study to show how targets, bystanders, and bullies (dis)engage with bullying conflicts in real-life scenarios. By exploring bullying conflicts as experienced by these three groups, organizational members and researchers might have a better understanding of some of the forces that constitute the phenomenon and potentially locate leverage points for more effective interventions. We begin by describing the features that make workplace bullying a unique type of conflict. From this, we outline a typology of interpersonal motivations in conflict situations adopted from the multiple goals theory (Ohbuchi & Tedeschi, 1997) and a framework for conflict management tactics adapted from Rahim’s (2002) theory of managing organizational conflict. We then explain why the three factors of focus in the chapter—profiles, motivations, tactics—are useful for understanding bullying conflicts and subsequently flesh out these three factors for each employee group in the thrice-told tale. We wrap up the discussion by exploring the contextual issues surrounding bullying conflicts, presenting ideas for transformation, and suggesting potential avenues for further research.
Workplace Bullying as a Unique Form of Conflict
Workplace bullying takes place between and among people who work together and is marked by
a pattern of repeated hostile behaviors over an extended period of time; actual or perceived intent to harm on the part of the actor [bully]; one party being unable to defend him- or herself; [and] a power imbalance between parties. (Keashly & Nowell, 2011, p. 424)
Power disparity is central to bullying conflicts, and research calls the disadvantaged parties targets. The target’s disadvantaged position can be due to position (e.g., supervisory bul- lying1), influence, or charisma; or can develop because of the persistent “hammering away” characteristic of bullying (Tracy, Lutgen- Sandvik, & Alberts, 2006, p. 163).
Bullying is a pattern of communication, and when targeted workers try to explain their experiences, they often struggle with encapsulating their story, usually needing “to describe the entire set of behaviors and their interrelationships” (Keashly & Jagatic, 2011, p. 50). The enduring character of bullying contributes to targets’ feelings of powerlessness. Persistent aggressive attacks contribute to increased stress and decreased coping capacity, which increase feelings of powerlessness, making targets even more easily bullied and less able to defend themselves.
Bullying is escalatory; initially aggression is passive, circuitous, and immensely difficult to describe, increasing in frequency and antagonism as time passes. In extremely escalated incidences, aggressors may even start to objectify their targets, which enable the use of more aggressive, inhuman attacks. In some instances, “the total destruction of the opponent is seen as the ultimate goal to be attained by the parties” (Einarsen, Hoel, Zapf, & Cooper, 2003, p. 19).
Conflict, on the other hand, involves (a) parties that are interdependent (i.e., they have the capability to impede or interfere with the other), (b) a perception by at least one party that an opposition or incompatibility (or the potential thereof) exists among the goals or values, and (c) some type of interaction among the involved parties (Knapp, Putnam, & Davis, 1988). Bullying includes these general indicators of conflict but has additional features making them conflicts that are “most like intractable, escalating violent conflicts between unequals” (Keashly & Nowell, 2011, p. 427). In such conflicts, the bullies’ goals might be to harm or drive targets from the workplace; targets’ goals may be to end abusive treatment and repair identity. And the aggressive character of bullying conflicts creates hostile work environments affecting many employees, whether directly targeted or not.