Workplace bullying and diffident silence: a moderated mediation model of shame and core self-evaluation

Abstract

Purpose Workplace bullying generates various emotions, including shame in the target; these emotions can induce employee silence. However, the role of shame in the relationship between workplace bullying and employee silence, and the individual differences in how victims experience shame and silence, has not yet been explored. The present study aims to fill this gap in the literature, using the effect of shame as a mediator and core self-evaluation (CSE) as a moderator. Design/methodology/approach Two thousand faculty members working in different colleges in India were invited to participate in the online survey. The participants were invited to fill in the questionnaire only if they had experienced shame by bullying during the preceding two weeks. Three hundred and twenty faculty members responded to the survey. Findings The results showed that shame mediates the relationship between workplace bullying and diffident silence. In addition, CSE moderates the relationship between shame and diffident silence but not the relationship between workplace bullying and shame. That is, diffident silence induced by shame was noted to be weaker for employees with high CSE. Importantly, the study could not find any individual difference in experiencing shame by bullying. Practical implications Improved CSE can effectively influence diffident silence through shame, helping the management to recognize workplace bullying. Originality/value It is a unique attempt to address diffident silence among Indian academicians, and study the role of targets’ shame and CSE while adopting silence on workplace bullying.

Consequences of workplace bullying on hotel employees: a three-wave longitudinal approach

“…Describing the Indian context as a paradoxical setting for workplace bullying, D 'Cruz et al (2018) noted that while spirituality and social relationships could alleviate the effects of bullying, power disparity and social inequality could trigger bullying. It is also pertinent to note that in high power distance and collectivist cultures such as that of India, employees may feel an added pressure to remain silent even though they experience bullying (Krishna et al, 2023;Rai and Agarwal, 2018b) and may thus, eventually feel more alienated and emotionally worn out. In such cultures, bullying-induced work alienation and emotional exhaustion may, therefore, rapidly escalate into employees' exit intentions.…”

“…(3) power disparity between the perpetrator(s) and the target(s); and (4) feeling of being persecuted owing to the harassment (Krishna et al, 2023;Einarsen et al, 2011;Coetzee and van Dyk, 2018;Nielsen and Einarsen, 2018;Agarwal, 2018a, 2018b;Reknes et al, 2021).…”

“…Researchers (Einarsen et al , 2011; Hershcovis, 2011; Huang et al , 2018) have observed that employees’ exit intentions are strengthened by deleterious workplace experiences, like abusive supervision, ostracism and bullying. Using Lee and Mitchell (1994) “Unfolding Model of Voluntary Turnover,” researchers (Ahmad and Kaleem, 2020; Reknes et al , 2021) have suggested that bullying incidents may cause “shocks” and “image violations” and thus stimulate employees’ exit intentions. Several research studies have empirically confirmed that exposure to bullying heightens employees’ exit intentions (Ahmad and Kaleem, 2020; Reknes et al , 2021; Vukelić et al , 2019).…”

Role of workplace bullying and workplace incivility for employee performance: Mediated-moderated mechanism

“…But, the involvement of comportments like using abusive language, name-calling, blustering, bullying, and mild to high levels of deviant behaviors can cause dissatisfaction among workers and can compromise their performance [ 2 ]. Workplace bullying is becoming a serious concern for all organizations because it is considered a stressor that negatively affects the psychological and physical well-being of the target object [ 3 ]. Workplace bullying includes any act like harassing or offending someone by targeting their psychological, physical, or workplace well-being [ 4 ].…”