Raising voice, risking retaliation: Events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace.

Abstract

This study advances the literature on workplace deviance, addressing retaliation victimization in the context of interpersonal mistreatment. Using survey data from 1,167 public-sector employees, the authors investigated experiences of work retaliation victimization and social retaliation victimization among employees who have vocally resisted interpersonal mistreatment. Regression analyses suggest that different victim voice mechanisms trigger different forms of retaliation, depending on the social positions of the mistreatment victim and instigator. Discriminant function analyses demonstrate lower professional, psychological, and physical well-being among mistreated employees who have been further victimized with retaliation. These analyses also reveal health-related costs associated with victim silence-that is, enduring mistreatment without voicing resistance. Results are interpreted in light of theory on power, emotions, and justice in organizations.

Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace

“…Workplace incivility is instigated by people operating within structures of power and hierarchy (Cortina & Magley, 2003), and the powerful tend to react to their environments very differently than the powerless (e.g., Galinsky et al, 2003). These power dynamics are complicated, and they extend to observers of incivility as much as targets and perpetrators.…”

“…These kinds of responses are enacted by witnesses concerned with not becoming targets themselves (Cortina & Magley, 2003). This can involve avoiding interactions with the perpetrator, convincing themselves that the incivility was not worth acting on, denying its severity or ignoring it altogether (e.g.…”

Observing workplace incivility.

“…This paper makes three important contributions. First, by examining observer reactions toward targets, we help to resolve conflicting arguments that third-parties will either compensate (Lotz, Okimoto, Schlösser, & Fetchenhauer, 2011) or develop negative evaluations of (e.g., Cortina & Magley, 2003) targets of mistreatment. Organizations are responsible for providing a safe work environment for employees; to do so, it is important to understand whether witnessing incivility alters observer behavior towards targets.…”

Authenticity, employee silence, prohibitive voice, and the moderating effect of organizational identification

“…By contrast, when employees express concerns about work practices, incidents, and employee behavior that might be harmful to their organization or stakeholders (i.e., prohibitive voice; Liang et al, 2012), this sometimes evokes suspicion, opposition, and even retaliation (Cortina & Magley 2003;Near & Miceli, 1996). Thus, employees may remain silent because they are afraid of negative consequences (i.e., quiescent silence; Pinder & Harlos, 2001).…”