Bullying and Harassment as a Consequence of Workplace Change in the Australian Civil Service: Investigating the Mediating Role of Satisfaction With Change Management

• Author: Bjorn Kleizen,Jan Wynen,Jan Boon,Jolijn de Roover
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X211036732
• Published date: 01 March 2023
• Date: 01 March 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X211036732

Review of Public Personnel Administration

2023, Vol. 43(1) 56 –79

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0734371X211036732

journals.sagepub.com/home/rop

Article

Bullying and Harassment as a

Consequence of Workplace

Change in the Australian Civil

Service: Investigating the

Mediating Role of Satisfaction

With Change Management

Bjorn Kleizen1, Jan Wynen1, Jan Boon1,2,

and Jolijn de Roover1

Abstract

Public sector organizations frequently restructure due to shifting management trends,

crises, and political developments. Earlier research indicates that the sometimes-drastic

reforms implemented in government strongly affect employees, causing psychosocial

effects such as frustration, stress, and negative work environments. This may in turn

increase the likelihood of severe phenomena such as workplace bullying and harassment.

It remains unclear, however, how public organizations can introduce changes while

preventing side-effects such as bullying and harassment. The goal of this article is twofold.

First, we test whether evidence on the relationship between workplace change and

bullying and harassment holds when using a large, public sector-wide sample. Second, we

investigate whether satisfaction with change management plays a mediating role. Using

cross-sectional and strata-based panel data analyses on Australian data, results indicate a

positive relationship between workplace change and workplace bullying and harassment,

but also suggest that satisfaction with change management mitigates this effect.

Keywords

bullying and harassment, workplace change, change management, organizational

change

1University of Antwerp, Belgium

2Antwerp Management School, Belgium

Corresponding Author:

Bjorn Kleizen, Department of Political Science, Research Group Politics & Public Governance (PPG),

University of Antwerp, Faculty of Social Sciences, Sint Jacobstraat 2, Antwerpen 2000, Belgium.

Email: bjorn.kleizen@uantwerpen.be

1036732ROPXXX10.1177/0734371X211036732Review of Public Personnel AdministrationKleizen et al.

research-article2021

Kleizen et al. 57

Introduction

Recent years have seen public organizations implementing workplace change at

breakneck speeds, for example, combining downsizing efforts following the financial

crisis with pressures toward digitalization, defragmentation, and new forms of coop-

eration with other public or private organizations (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2017). We

know from earlier studies that intrusive workplace changes—in particular when these

changes are not supported by employees—may foster various problematic psychoso-

cial effects, ranging from uncertainty to frustration and cynicism (Oreg et al., 2011;

Qian & Daniels, 2008). When such adverse psychosocial effects are generated, it is

possible that the organization’s work environment will increasingly facilitate negative

interpersonal interactions.

There is a growing level of support that workplace change may even stimulate bul-

lying and harassment, as frustrations mount and the uncertainty brought about by

change provides opportunities for multiple forms of harassment (Baillien et al., 2019;

Hutchinson et al., 2005; Skogstad et al., 2007). Opportunities for various forms of bul-

lying and harassment increase during change transitions, with some individuals using

otherwise legitimate restructuring processes as a means of harming their targets

(D’Cruz et al., 2014; Hutchinson et al., 2005). Also, individuals may vent change-

related frustrations and stress on colleagues, subordinates, or superiors (Baillien & De

Witte, 2009; Baillien et al., 2019; Salin, 2003; Skogstad et al., 2007). In some cases,

these antagonistic behaviors may repeatedly be perpetrated against a target, causing

the behavior to develop into long-term workplace bullying and harassment (e.g.,

Baillien et al., 2019; D’Cruz, 2014; Nielsen et al., 2020; Skogstad et al., 2007).

Despite the increasing evidence supporting the existence of a link between work-

place change and workplace bullying and harassment (Baillien et al., 2019; D’Cruz

et al., 2014; Hutchinson et al., 2005; Skogstad et al., 2007), hardly any research has

been devoted to how transitioning organizations could influence the level of bullying

and harassment behavior through (change) management. A notable exception is Holten

et al. (2017), who investigate whether leadership quality could moderate the change-

bullying relationship, although their findings do not provide support for such a moder-

ating role (they instead find that leadership quality has a direct effect on bullying).

Such a lack of research is surprising when considering that workplace bullying and

harassment is both a widespread and a substantially harmful phenomenon in public

sector workplaces (D’Cruz et al., 2014; Hutchinson et al., 2005; Venetoklis & Kettunen,

2016). For instance, in the Australian federal civil service, survey results consistently

place the overall percentage of employees experiencing workplace bullying and

harassment behavior between 13% and 16% (Australian Public Service Commission

[APSC], 2019, p.58), while some regional governments even observe rates exceeding

20% (Office of the Commissioner for Public Employment, 2017). Workplace bullying

and harassment is also substantially damaging to both its victims and the organization,

as bullying and harassment has inter alia been linked to heightened anxiety, depres-

sion, sick leave, turnover, and even symptoms akin to posttraumatic stress syndrome

(e.g., Einarsen & Nielsen, 2015; Nielsen et al., 2015; Venetoklis & Kettunen, 2016).