Revision of the workplace bullying checklist: the importance of human resource management's role in defining and addressing workplace bullying

• Date: 01 January 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12049
• Author: Suzy Fox,Renee L. Cowan
• Published date: 01 January 2015

Revision of the workplace bullying checklist: the

importance of human resource management’s role

in defining and addressing workplace bullying

Suzy Fox, Quinlan School of Business, Loyola University Chicago

Renee L. Cowan, Department of Communication, University of Texas at San

Antonio

Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 25, no 1, 2015, pages 116–130

Human resource professionals (HRPs) in the US are important actors in workplace bullying (WB)

situations. Most WB research currently focuses on the target but fails to include the individual most often

left to interpret and respond to complaints of bullying – the HRP. We argue that because HRPs must work

to identify, understand and deal with victims and bullies; HR should have a voice in assessing WB. The

difficulties HRPs report in effectively responding to employee complaints of WB have been attributed to a

number of factors, including conflicts among multiple HR roles in the organisation, a paucity of specific

organisational policies and guidelines for dealing with bullying, and ambiguous definitions and criteria for

behaviour to be considered bullying. The impetus for the study reported here was the need to clarify the

definition of bullying incorporating the HR perspective, determine what behaviours and criteria are seen

as bullying by HRPs. Scale use and limitations are discussed as well as theoretical and practical

implications.

Contact: Prof. Suzy Fox, Institute of Human Resources and Employment Relations, Quinlan

School of Business, Loyola University Chicago, 820 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60611,

USA. Email: Sfox1@luc.edu

Keywords: human resource roles; workplace bullying; measurement

INTRODUCTION

Workplace bullying (WB) is generally defined as extreme, negative, and pervasive or

persistent workplace abuse, experienced by targets as an imbalance of power, and

which can cause distress, humiliation and other adverse consequences for the target

and the organisation (Rayner and Keashly, 2005; Einarsen etal., 2009). WB covers a wide range

of behaviours, from subtle incivilities to blatant threats, and has the potential to spiral into serious

conflict, a hostile work environment and even physical violence (Fox and Freeman, 2011).

When present in the workplace, bullying can have serious effects on individuals and the

organisation. Consequences to individuals include health problems, such as post-traumatic

stress disorder and depression; identity crisis; emotional damage, such as humiliation, doubt

and stress; and vicious cycles of counterproductive work behaviour (Hoel et al., 2004; Fox and

Stallworth, 2010). Effects on the organisation can be very costly and counterproductive. Costs

can include those associated with high turnover rates, absenteeism, intention to leave, high job

insecurity, reduced productivity and legal costs (Hoel et al., 2004, 2011; Glambek et al., 2014).

Other consequences include damage to company reputation, decreased loyalty and

commitment to company and culture, and decreased performance (Fox and Stallworth, 2010).

The issue of WB continues to garner much attention in the scholarly, practitioner and public

media, yet there is little consensus among professionals and academics of best practices for

assessing the prevalence and consequences of WB.

bs_bs_banner

doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12049

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 25 NO 1, 2015116

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Please cite this article in press as: Fox, S. and Cowan, R.L. (2015) ‘Revision of the workplace bullying checklist: the importance of human resource

management’s role in defining and addressing workplace bullying’. Human Resource Management Journal 25: 1, 116–130.