Workplace bullying complaints: lessons for “good HR practice”

Abstract

Purpose Current research provides an incomplete picture of the challenges facing human resource personnel (HRP) tasked with managing a workplace bullying complaint. The purpose of this paper is to provide a holistic model of the complaint management process in order to advance the theorising of HRP’s role in this important process, and the challenges they face in undertaking it. Design/methodology/approach Cases of workplace bullying heard before the legal system were analysed – a novel data source in research on workplace bullying. Thematic analysis was undertaken on the case determinations to identify the challenges HRP faced that prevented the resolution of the complaint. Findings The analysis indicated two key phases in the complaints management process with five associated challenges. The first two challenges were related to HRP’s ability to assess the substance of the complaint. HRP’s ability or inability to “sort out” conflicting accounts and to follow the process saw the complaint follow one of three “resolution pathways”. Three further challenges were associated with HRP communicating the outcome to the complainant. Failure to overcome these challenges left the complainant aggrieved at the unfairness in which their complaint had been handled – triggering legal action. Originality/value This paper draws on a novel data source to provide a holistic model of the complaint management process related to workplace bullying which details the various components and challenges related to HRP throughout the process. Alongside advancing theory, this research has practical value for improving HR practice.

“ . . . A Bit of a Joke”: Policy and Workplace Bullying

“…The parties are thus polarized and required to take up opposite corners of the ring. Targets can reach a point of unwillingness to accept the findings of an investigation and demand outcomes that are unreasonable (Catley et al, 2016).…”

“…Employees unequivocally expect HR to defend and support them, yet HR, faced with disapprobation from managers can avoid instigating anti-bullying policy and align themselves with managers, as noted by Harrington et al (2012). HRMs find themselves in an impossible position given the inherent tension between their roles as a business partner and employee champion (Beirne & Hunter, 2012;Catley et al, 2016). Managers, while not being solely responsible, play an important role in the process, but perhaps more so in terms of prevention.…”

The Role and Impact of Leaders on Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment

“…Research has found plenty of support in revealing that figures of authority represent the perpetrator(s) in the majority of workplace bullying incidents (Baillien et al, 2016;Martin & LaVan, 2010), which has been found to be the case even in litigated cases (e.g. Catley, Blackwood, Forsyth, Tappin, & Bentley, 2017;Martin & LaVan, 2010). When examining antecedents of leader bullying, an important distinction that can be made is the role of individual characteristics versus situational factors (Harvey, Treadywa, Heames, & Duke, 2009).…”

“…Thus, leadership and HRM often work closely together to ensure employee motivation, performance and discipline. HRM can be viewed as an advocate for employees, and workplace bullying incidents within an organization would fall within the jurisdiction of the HRM department (Catley, Blackwood, Forsyth, Tappin, & Bentley, 2017;Fox & Cowan, 2015). The policies and procedures that human resource managers develop and create may have the potential to deter bullying behaviour, since these policies may govern the way in which employees are encouraged to interact with one another.…”

Development of a Taxonomy of Workplace Bullying Intervention Types: Informing Research Directions and Supporting Organizational Decision Making

“…documented issues in the nature and implementation of specific programs or intervention types, which may or may not be specific to workplace bullying, without implementation or evaluation per se (e.g., Catley, Blackwood, Forsyth, Tappin, & Bentley, 2017; Salin, 2008);…”