)
Early this year, Pulkit Sharma and Raman Sisodia joined one of India's leading advertising agencies as entry level copywriter and executive creative director, respectively. They joined on the same day but none of them knew that they will meet the same fate within three months of taking up the new job.
Here is a brief backgrounder on what was happening at the agency then. The board had just appointed a new national creative director. His strategy was to build a team with a bunch of old faithfuls who had jumped agencies with him on earlier occasions. For obvious reasons, he wanted to get rid of a few of those hired by his predecessor. Being the newest recruits, Sharma and Sisodia became soft targets for bullying. While Sharma was pulled up at the slightest opportunity, Sisodia's prior experience could not shield him against the new NCD's wrath. While Sisodia quit shortly, Sharma being a fresher decided to put up. They went different ways, but the issue was the same: they were both victims of workplace bullying.
Bullying is a pattern of unreasonable behaviour and is defined as a workplace hazard. Often, there is no proof and no witnesses, and even if work colleagues know what is going on, they tend not to speak up. But it is rife, as demonstrated by a new global study on workplace bullying by Audencia Nantes School of Management professor Nikos Bozionelos and his co-authors. The study, however, shows some clear patterns in the way employees react to such bullying.
More From This Section
Bozionelos and his co-authors surveyed 1,484 alumni and current MBA students from 14 countries worldwide. "Our study shows that while the type of industry, salary and gender all influence acceptability of workplace bullying, the country's culture of work is the biggest factor," says Bozionelos. "This is vital for multi national corporations setting global HR policies and for employees considering out-of-country assignments. Both management and employees must come to grips with the realisation that acceptance of employee abuse depends on location."
The US and the UK were among the countries with a 'high performance orientation' valuing accomplishments, a sense of urgency and explicit communication. These countries, say the authors, may tolerate bullying if it is seen as a means to achieve better results. In contrast, countries such as Argentina, Mexico and Colombia value humane treatment of the individual more.
The research implies that bullying might bring greater productivity in certain cases but it comes at a cost. In extreme cases, shouting, unfair division of labour or employee segregation can cause physical trauma. As a result, workers can feel trapped, developing anxiety, depression and even suicidal thoughts.
The global study notes that in Asian countries like Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan, supervisors' large degree of power means employees are more likely to accept bullying. Meanwhile, workers in countries like the UK may fall victim to bullying at the same rate as Asians but suffer more because of their belief in an ideal of fairness. One theme common in the research into workplace bullying is envy. Mostly, the targets of bullying behaviour are successful, high-performing employees.
Psychologists say there are various reasons that bullying takes place, but they agree the problem is aggravated in difficult financial times: there is competition for resources, so people undermine others to shore up their own position. Evidently, employers need to realise this issue is important. There is training available and organisations have a duty to take it up.
