Thank you for your thoughtful article on workplace bullying. I agree that organizations need to understand the nature and potential costs of bully to be motivated to find workable solutions address the problem. The problem is greater, however, in that once organizations are motivated, there isn’t much out there in terms of workable solutions. The cited Von Bergen article offers “legal remedies” consisting of anti-bullying legislation. I would argue that legislation does not constitute a remedy, as the only recourse available is that of terminating the bully, and fired bullies will go on to work (and bully) in at their next job. Where is the solution?

I believe that a true solution lies in developing effective remediation methods for individuals who have interpersonally destructive management styles. The common myth holds that these so-called bullies intend to inflict harm on others, but in 15 years of coaching and researching what I refer to as “abrasive bosses”, I have found that the majority do not intend to harm others. True, they do crave power, but the objective is to seek power to reduce their profound anxiety at the prospect of being perceived as incompetent, and defend against this threat with aggression, manifested in their abrasive behaviors. Secondly, I have learned that they are generally blind to their impact on others – they lack the social sonar (empathic accuracy) to read other’s behavior and see the pain they cause. Where did they learn their harsh management styles? Abuse is learned (not innate), and I found that they themselves “learned” their styles from past family or early work experiences.

Workplace bullies (I prefer not to use this term, as it implies intent) are not a hopeless lot. If the organization is willing to set limits and consequences (up to and including termination), most abrasive bosses become highly motivated to “evolve” in the interests of survival. Specialized coaching can quickly help them see the devastating impact of their conduct and develop interpersonally competent, non-destructive management styles permanently. I have written about this approach in my book Taming the Abrasive Manager: How to End Unnecessary Roughness in the Workplace (2007, Jossey-Bass Publishers) and pursue my mission to end such psychological suffering in the workplace by training other executive coaches in this method through The Boss Whispering Institute (www.executivinsight.com). Thank you for bringing this problem to the fore, and I hope it will encourage others to research and develop the solutions you call for.

Best regards

Laura Crawshaw, Ph.D.
The Boss Whisperer ®

This was an interesting paper. According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), bullying could fall under the provisions of work-place violence. NIOSH defines workplace violence as violent acts (including physical assaults and threats of assaults) directed toward persons at work or on duty. Because work-place violence represent a serious safety and health hazard, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration developed violence prevention guidelines and recording and reporting requirements for business. OSHA draws their authority from the OSHA Act of 1970 which mandates that, in addition to compliance with hazard-specific standards, all employers have a general duty to provide their employees with a workplace free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious physical harm. OSHA relies on Section 5(a)(1) of the Act, the “General Duty Clause,” for enforcement authority. Failure to implement these guidelines is not in itself a violation of the General Duty Clause. However, employers can be cited for violating the General Duty Clause if there is a recognized hazard of workplace violence in their establishments and they do nothing to prevent or abate it. Any work-related violence that causes stress or mental illness can be considered a recordable injury and requires recording and reporting. According to 29CFR1904.5(b)(2)(ix) and 1904.7, mental illnesses, such as depression or anxiety disorder, that have work-related stress as a contributing factor, are recordable if the employee voluntarily provides the employer with an opinion from a physician or other licensed health care professional with appropriate training and experience (psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse practitioner, etc.) stating that the employee has a mental illness that is work-related, and the case meets one or more of the general recording criteria. The goals of OSHA is to eliminate or reduce worker exposure to conditions that lead to death or injury from violence by implementing effective work-place prevention programs.

OSHA Regulations/Standards can be obtained by going to: Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Department of Labor (2009). Regulations (Standards – 29CFR). Retrieved January 28, 2009 from http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owasrch.search_form?p_doc_type=STANDARDS&p_toc_level=0&p_keyvalue=

“Cyber Victimization in Higher Education will focus on harassment-related issues in the online environment. Please join this informal discussion to deepen your understanding about the nature of the phenomenon, its scope, and its impact on victims. Resources available to address the problem in the higher education setting will be described. As part of the discussion, participants? insights on handling incidents and reducing incident frequency will be welcome.
Guest Speaker will be Amy Ginther,
Coordinator, Policy Development and Education, Project NEThics.”