THE SOLUTION
So how can we overcome this bias and expect managers (and others) to respond with the urgency that bullying requires? We believe that more needs to be done to assist non-targets to understand the harmful affect workplace bullying creates. Key to this, we believe, comes though highlighting and reinforcing the major definitional element–—the enduring and repeated nature of the inappropriate behaviors. The question is, can primary prevention efforts such as the implementation of a new written policy or a half-day awareness-building seminar achieve permanent change in understanding and perceptions? We suggest NO. We do propose however, that a comprehensive awareness program is required. Such a program may look something like this: First individuals need to be trained in what bullying is and, importantly, what it is not. In line with our research findings, emphasis should be made that not all bullying behaviors are easy to recognize, and that the behaviors that we might think may cause the most harm are not sometimes the worst for recipients (and vice versa). Participants should also be introduced to the more insidious and subtle nature of bullying, highlighting that behaviors such as someone withholding information from you, excessive monitoring of your work, being exposed to an unmanageable workload or being ignored by others when they occur regularly and in combination with each other can have a crippling effect on targets. Thus, the repeated and cumulative effect of bullying on individuals as well as how this affects targets needs to be reinforced. In addition, the escalating nature of bullying and the correlating decline in the target’s ability to function (remember the backpack analogy?) needs to be highlighted and demonstrated in a range of ways to participants. This means going beyond showing a video of people talking about bullying and rather engaging participants in activities that demonstrate the effect of repeated inappropriate behaviors on an individual (the previously presented backpack activity can be very effective for demonstrating this). We believe this approach will debunk some of the commonly held myths of workplace bullying and reduce the overuse of the term to describe any incident of inappropriate or intimidating behavior in the workplace. Importantly, a comprehensive training program that seeks to increase participants’ understanding of bullying needs to occur within each level of the organization, including those at the very top. But as our study demonstrates, those who are expected to respond and manage cases of bullying or model positive behaviors may not understand the severity of the phenomenon (unless they have previously on the receiving end of such behaviors). Those who are responsible within the organization for responding to an accusation of bullying or for offering support, be they managers or contact officers, must take concerns about bullying seriously. Indeed, if organizations want to eradicate (as far as possible) workplace bullying, substantial resources and time need to be invested not just into training but also into organizational structures, procedures and policies. In doing this, organizations will make all members of the workforce responsible for addressing workplace bullying as well as other similar inappropriate behaviors. Ideally we suggest organizations move to adopting a primary prevention approach that addresses bullying and the culture that condones it. Programs such as the Civility, Respect and Engagement in the Workplace (CREW) initiative can be very effective. In this program constructive interpersonal interactions are developed rather than concentrating on the reduction of inappropriate behaviors.
