Workplace incivility

Last updated

Workplace incivility has been defined as low-intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target. Uncivil behaviors are characteristically rude and discourteous, displaying a lack of regard for others. [1] The authors hypothesize there is an "incivility spiral" in the workplace made worse by "asymmetric global interaction". [1]

Contents

Incivility is distinct from aggression. The reduction of workplace incivility is an area for ongoing industrial and organizational psychology research.

Surveys on occurrence and effects

A summary of research conducted in Europe suggests that workplace incivility is common there. [2] In research on more than 1000 U.S. civil service workers, Cortina, Magley, Williams, and Langhout (2001) found that more than 70% of the sample experienced workplace incivility in the past five years. [2] Similarly, Laschinger, Leiter, Day, and Gilin found that among 612 staff nurses, 67.5% had experienced incivility from their supervisors and 77.6% had experienced incivility from their coworkers. [3] In addition, they found that low levels of incivility along with low levels of burnout and an empowering work environment were significant predictors of nurses' experiences of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. [3] Incivility was associated with occupational stress and reduced job satisfaction. Other research shows that workplace incivility relates to job stress, depression, and life satisfaction as well. [4]

After conducting more than six hundred interviews with "employees, managers, and professionals in varying industries across the United States" and collecting "survey data from an additional sample of more than 1,200 employees, managers, and professionals representing all industrial categories in the United States and Canada", Pearson and Porath wrote in 2004 that "The grand conclusion: incivility does matter. Whether its costs are borne by targets, their colleagues, their organizations, their families, their friends outside work, their customers, witnesses to the interactions, or even the instigators themselves, there is a price to be paid for uncivil encounters among coworkers." [5] Citing previous research (2000) Pearson writes that "more than half the targets waste work time worrying about the incident or planning how to deal with or avert future interactions with the instigator. Nearly 40 percent reduced their commitment to the organization; 20 percent told us that they reduced their work effort intentionally as a result of the incivility, and 10 percent of targets said that they deliberately cut back the amount of time they spent at work." [6]

Studies suggest that social support can buffer the negative effects of workplace incivility. Individuals who felt emotionally and organizationally socially supported reported fewer negative consequences (less depression and job stress, and higher in job and life satisfaction) of workplace incivility compared to those who felt less supported. [4] Research also suggests that the negative effects of incivility can be offset by feelings of organizational trust and high regard for one's workgroup. [7]

Subtle/covert examples

Examples at the more subtle end of the spectrum include: [1]

Overt examples

Somewhere between the extremes are numerous everyday examples of workplace rudeness and impropriety including: [8]

Other overt forms of incivility might include emotional tirades and losing one's temper. [8]

Corporate symptoms of long term incivility

  1. Higher than normal employee turnover. [9]
  2. A large number of employee grievances and complaints. [9]
  3. Lost work time by employees calling in sick. [9]
  4. Increased consumer complaints. [9]
  5. Diminished productivity in terms of quality and quantity of work. [9]
  6. Cultural and communications barriers. [9]
  7. Lack of confidence in leadership. [9]
  8. Inability to adapt effectively to change. [9]
  9. Lack of individual accountability. [9]
  10. Lack of respect. [9]

Predicting

Gender

A number of studies have shown that women are more likely than men to experience workplace incivility and its associated negative outcomes. [10] [11] Research also shows that employees who witness incivility directed toward female coworkers have lower psychological wellbeing, physical health, and job satisfaction, which in turn relates lowered commitment toward the organization and higher job burnout and turnover intentions. [12] Miner-Rubino and Cortina (2004) found that observing incivility toward women related to increased work withdrawal for both male and female employees, especially in work contexts where there were more men. [13]

Other research shows that incivility directed toward same-gender coworkers tends to lead to more negative emotionality for observers. [14] While both men and women felt anger, fear, and anxiety arising from same-gender incivility, women additionally reported higher levels of demoralization after witnessing such mistreatment. [14] Furthermore, the negative effects of same-gender incivility were more pronounced for men observing men mistreating other men than for women observing women mistreating other women. [14] Miner and Eischeid (2012) suggest this disparity reflects men perceiving uncivil behavior as a “clear affront to the power and status they have learned to expect for their group in interpersonal interactions.” [14]

Motherhood status has also been examined as a possible predictor of being targeted for incivility in the workplace. [15] This research shows that mothers with three or more children report more incivility than women with two, one, or zero children. [15] Fathers, on the other hand, report more incivility than men without children, but still less than mothers. While motherhood appears to predict increases in workplace incivility, results also showed that the negative outcomes associated with incivility were mitigated by motherhood status. Fatherhood status, on the other hand, did not mitigate the relationship between incivility and outcomes. Childless women reported more workplace incivility than childless men, and showed a stronger relationship between incivility and negative outcomes than childless men, mothers, and fathers. [15]

Cortina (2008) conceptualizes incivility that amounts to covert practices of sexism and/or racism in the workplace as selective incivility. [16] For example, Ozturk and Berber (2022) demonstrate significant evidence of subtle racism in UK workplaces, where racialized professionals appear to be the main targets of selective incivility. [17]

Workplace bullying

Workplace bullying overlaps to some degree with workplace incivility but tends to encompass more intense and typically repeated acts of disregard and rudeness. Negative spirals of increasing incivility between organizational members can result in bullying, [18] but isolated acts of incivility are not conceptually bullying despite the apparent similarity in their form and content. In case of bullying, the intent of harm is less ambiguous, an unequal balance of power (both formal and informal) is more salient, and the target of bullying feels threatened, vulnerable and unable to defend himself or herself against negative recurring actions. [19] [20]

Petty authority

Another related notion is petty tyranny, which also involves a lack of consideration towards others, although petty tyranny is more narrowly defined as a profile of leaders and can also involve more severe forms of abuse of power and of authority. [1]

See also

Related Research Articles

Industrial and organizational psychology "focuses the lens of psychological science on a key aspect of human life, namely, their work lives. In general, the goals of I-O psychology are to better understand and optimize the effectiveness, health, and well-being of both individuals and organizations." It is an applied discipline within psychology and is an international profession. I-O psychology is also known as occupational psychology in the United Kingdom, organisational psychology in Australia and New Zealand, and work and organizational (WO) psychology throughout Europe and Brazil. Industrial, work, and organizational (IWO) psychology is the broader, more global term for the science and profession.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Job satisfaction</span> Attitude of a person towards work

Job satisfaction, employee satisfaction or work satisfaction is a measure of workers' contentment with their job, whether they like the job or individual aspects or facets of jobs, such as nature of work or supervision. Job satisfaction can be measured in cognitive (evaluative), affective, and behavioral components. Researchers have also noted that job satisfaction measures vary in the extent to which they measure feelings about the job. or cognitions about the job.

Organizational behavior or organisational behaviour is the: "study of human behavior in organizational settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself". Organizational behavioral research can be categorized in at least three ways:

Workplace bullying is a persistent pattern of mistreatment from others in the workplace that causes either physical or emotional harm. It can include such tactics as verbal, nonverbal, psychological, and physical abuse, as well as humiliation. This type of workplace aggression is particularly difficult because, unlike the typical school bully, workplace bullies often operate within the established rules and policies of their organization and their society. In the majority of cases, bullying in the workplace is reported as having been done by someone who has authority over the victim. However, bullies can also be peers, and subordinates. When subordinates participate in bullying this phenomenon is known as upwards bullying .The least visible segment of workplace bullying involves upwards bullying where bully- ing tactics are manipulated and applied against “the boss,” usually for strategically designed outcomes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Affective events theory</span> Psychological model

Affective events theory (AET) is an industrial and organizational psychology model developed by organizational psychologists Howard M. Weiss and Russell Cropanzano to explain how emotions and moods influence job performance and job satisfaction. The model explains the linkages between employees' internal influences and their reactions to incidents that occur in their work environment that affect their performance, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. The theory proposes that affective work behaviors are explained by employee mood and emotions, while cognitive-based behaviors are the best predictors of job satisfaction. The theory proposes that positive-inducing as well as negative-inducing emotional incidents at work are distinguishable and have a significant psychological impact upon workers' job satisfaction. This results in lasting internal and external affective reactions exhibited through job performance, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment.

Occupational health psychology (OHP) is an interdisciplinary area of psychology that is concerned with the health and safety of workers. OHP addresses a number of major topic areas including the impact of occupational stressors on physical and mental health, the impact of involuntary unemployment on physical and mental health, work-family balance, workplace violence and other forms of mistreatment, psychosocial workplace factors that affect accident risk and safety, and interventions designed to improve and/or protect worker health. Although OHP emerged from two distinct disciplines within applied psychology, namely, health psychology and industrial and organizational psychology, for a long time the psychology establishment, including leaders of industrial/organizational psychology, rarely dealt with occupational stress and employee health, creating a need for the emergence of OHP. OHP has also been informed by other disciplines, including occupational medicine, sociology, industrial engineering, and economics, as well as preventive medicine and public health. OHP is thus concerned with the relationship of psychosocial workplace factors to the development, maintenance, and promotion of workers' health and that of their families. The World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization estimate that exposure to long working hours causes an estimated 745,000 workers to die from ischemic heart disease and stroke in 2016, mediated by occupational stress.

Workplace aggression is a specific type of aggression which occurs in the workplace. Workplace aggression is any type of hostile behavior that occurs in the workplace. It can range from verbal insults and threats to physical violence, and it can occur between coworkers, supervisors, and subordinates. Common examples of workplace aggression include gossiping, bullying, intimidation, sabotage, sexual harassment, and physical violence. These behaviors can have serious consequences, including reduced productivity, increased stress, and decreased morale.

Job performance assesses whether a person performs a job well. Job performance, studied academically as part of industrial and organizational psychology, also forms a part of human resources management. Performance is an important criterion for organizational outcomes and success. John P. Campbell describes job performance as an individual-level variable, or something a single person does. This differentiates it from more encompassing constructs such as organizational performance or national performance, which are higher-level variables.

Workplace revenge, or workplace retaliation, refers to the general action of purposeful retaliation within the workplace. Retaliation often involves a power imbalance; the retaliator is usually someone with more power in the workplace than the victim, and retaliation may be done to silence the victim so the retaliator can avoid accountability for workplace bullying, workplace harassment, or other misbehaviors in the workplace. Retaliation, legally, refers to actions taken as punishment for legally permitted behaviors: disciplinary actions taken by employers in reaction to behaviors that are counter to applicable laws or to established institutional policies are permitted as part of the employer's ability to control the work environment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occupational stress</span> Tensions related to work

Occupational stress is psychological stress related to one's job. Occupational stress refers to a chronic condition. Occupational stress can be managed by understanding what the stressful conditions at work are and taking steps to remediate those conditions. Occupational stress can occur when workers do not feel supported by supervisors or coworkers, feel as if they have little control over the work they perform, or find that their efforts on the job are incommensurate with the job's rewards. Occupational stress is a concern for both employees and employers because stressful job conditions are related to employees' emotional well-being, physical health, and job performance. The World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization conducted a study. The results showed that exposure to long working hours, operates through increased psycho-social occupational stress. It is the occupational risk factor with the largest attributable burden of disease, according to these official estimates causing an estimated 745,000 workers to die from ischemic heart disease and stroke events in 2016.

Despite a large body of positive psychological research into the relationship between happiness and productivity, happiness at work has traditionally been seen as a potential by-product of positive outcomes at work, rather than a pathway to business success. Happiness in the workplace is usually dependent on the work environment. During the past two decades, maintaining a level of happiness at work has become more significant and relevant due to the intensification of work caused by economic uncertainty and increase in competition. Nowadays, happiness is viewed by a growing number of scholars and senior executives as one of the major sources of positive outcomes in the workplace. In fact, companies with higher than average employee happiness exhibit better financial performance and customer satisfaction. It is thus beneficial for companies to create and maintain positive work environments and leadership that will contribute to the happiness of their employees.

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is employee's behavior that goes against the legitimate interests of an organization. This behavior can harm the organization, other people within it, and other people and organizations outside it, including employers, other employees, suppliers, clients, patients and citizens. It has been proposed that a person-by-environment interaction (the relationship between a person's psychological and physical capacities and the demands placed on those capacities by the person's social and physical environment.) can be utilized to explain a variety of counterproductive behaviors. For instance, an employee who is high on trait anger is more likely to respond to a stressful incident at work with CWB.

Social undermining is the expression of negative emotions directed towards a particular person or negative evaluations of the person as a way to prevent the person from achieving their goals.

Workplace harassment is the belittling or threatening behavior directed at an individual worker or a group of workers.

The nursing organization workplace has been identified as one in which workplace bullying occurs quite frequently. It is thought that relational aggression are relevant. Relational aggression has been studied amongst girls but rarely amongst adult women. According to a finding, 74% of the nurses, 100% of the anesthetists, and 80% of surgical technologists have experienced or witnessed uncivil behaviors like bullying by nursing faculty. There have been many incidents that have occurred throughout the past couple of years. OSHA, which stands for "Occupational Safety and Health Administration" stated that from 2011 to 2013, the United States healthcare workers experienced 15,000 to 20,000 significant injuries while in the workplace.

Positive psychology is defined as a method of building on what is good and what is already working instead of attempting to stimulate improvement by focusing on the weak links in an individual, a group, or in this case, a company. Implementing positive psychology in the workplace means creating an environment that is more enjoyable, productive, and values individual employees. This also means creating a work schedule that does not lead to emotional and physical distress.

Abusive supervision is most commonly studied in the context of the workplace, although it can arise in other areas such as in the household and at school. "Abusive supervision has been investigated as an antecedent to negative subordinate workplace outcome." "Workplace violence has combination of situational and personal factors". The study that was conducted looked at the link between abusive supervision and different workplace events.

Narcissism in the workplace involves the impact of narcissistic employees and managers in workplace settings.

Machiavellianism in the workplace is a concept studied by many organizational psychologists. Conceptualized originally by Richard Christie and Florence Geis, Machiavellianism refers to a psychological trait concept where individuals behave in a cold and duplicitous manner. It has in recent times been adapted and applied to the context of the workplace and organizations by many writers and academics.

Psychosocial safety climate (PSC) is a term used in organisational psychology that refers to the shared belief held by workers that their psychological health and safety is protected and supported by senior management. PSC builds on other work stress theories and concerns the corporate climate for worker psychological health and safety. Studies have found that a favourable PSC is associated with low rates of absenteeism and high productivity, while a poor climate is linked to high levels of workplace stress and job dissatisfaction. PSC can be promoted by organisational practices, policies and procedures that prioritise the psychosocial safety and wellbeing of workers. The theory has implications for the design of workplaces for the best possible outcomes for both workers and management.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Andersson, Lynne M.; Pearson, Christine M. (July 1999). "Tit for Tat? The Spiraling Effect of Incivility in the Workplace". The Academy of Management Review. 24 (3): 452–471. doi:10.2307/259136. JSTOR   259136.
  2. 1 2 Cortina, Lilia M.; Magley, Vicki J.; Williams, Jill Hunter; Langhout, Regina Day (2001). "Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact". Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 6 (1): 64–80. doi:10.1037/1076-8998.6.1.64. PMID   11199258.
  3. 1 2 Laschinger, Heather K. Spence.; Leiter, Michael; Day, Arla; Gilin, Debra (2009). "Workplace empowerment, incivility, and burnout: Impact on staff nurse recruitment and retention outcomes". Journal of Nursing Management. 17 (3): 302–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2009.00999.x . PMID   19426367.
  4. 1 2 Miner, K. N.; Settles, I. H.; Pratt-Hyatt, J. S.; Brady, C. C. (2012). "Experiencing Incivility in Organizations: The Buffering Effects of Emotional and Organizational Support". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 42 (2): 340–372. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00891.x.
  5. ↑ Christine M. Pearson, Christine L. Porath (2004). "On Incivility, Its Impact and Directions for Future Research". In Ricky W. Griffin and Anne O'Leary-Kelly (ed.). The Dark Side of Organizational Behavior. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 403–404. ISBN   978-0-7879-6223-4.
  6. ↑ Christine M. Pearson, Christine L. Porath (2004). "On Incivility, Its Impact and Directions for Future Research". In Ricky W. Griffin and Anne O'Leary-Kelly (ed.). The Dark Side of Organizational Behavior. John Wiley & Sons. p. 412. ISBN   978-0-7879-6223-4.
  7. ↑ Miner-Rubino, K.; Reed, W. D. (2010). "Testing a Moderated Mediational Model of Workgroup Incivility: The Roles of Organizational Trust and Group Regard". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 40 (12): 3148–3168. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00695.x.
  8. 1 2 Johnson, Pamela R.; Indvik, Julie (2001). "Slings and arrows of rudeness: incivility in the workplace". Journal of Management Development. 20 (8): 705–714. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005829.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 "9 signs your work place needs civility, 6 steps to achieve it - TechJournal". Archived from the original on 2015-06-09. Retrieved 25 September 2014.
  10. ↑ Bjorkqvist, K.; Osterman, K.; Hjelt-Back, M. (1994). "Aggression among university employees". Aggressive Behavior. 20 (3): 173–184. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:3<173::AID-AB2480200304>3.0.CO;2-D.
  11. ↑ Cortina, Lilia M.; Lonsway, Kimberly A.; Magley, Vicki J.; Freeman, Leslie V.; Collinsworth, Linda L.; Hunter, Mary; et al. (2002). "What's gender got to do with it? Incivility in the federal courts". Law and Social Inquiry. 27 (2): 235–270. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2002.tb00804.x. hdl: 2027.42/72366 . S2CID   73723515.
  12. ↑ Miner-Rubino, K.; Cortina, L. M. (2007). "Beyond targets: Consequences of vicarious exposure to misogyny at work". Journal of Applied Psychology. 92 (5): 1254–1269. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1254. PMID   17845084.
  13. ↑ Miner-Rubino, Kathi; Cortina, Lilia M (2004). "Working in a Context of Hostility Toward Women: Implications for Employees' Well-Being". Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 9 (2): 107–122. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.519.7664 . doi:10.1037/1076-8998.9.2.107. PMID   15053711.
  14. 1 2 3 4 Miner, K.; Eischeid, A. (2012). "Observing Incivility toward Coworkers and Negative Emotions: Do Gender of the Target and Observer Matter?". Sex Roles. 66 (7–8): 492–505. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0108-0. S2CID   145591501.
  15. 1 2 3 Miner-Rubino, K. "Does Being a Mom Help or Hurt? Workplace Incivility as a Function of Motherhood Status" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AWP Annual Conference, Marriott Newport Hotel, Newport, Rhode Island. 2014-11-30 from http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p314713_index.html%5B%5D
  16. ↑ Cortina, Lilia M. (2008). "Unseen injustice: incivility as modern discrimination in organizations". Academy of Management Review. 33 (1): 55–75. doi:10.5465/amr.2008.27745097.
  17. ↑ Ozturk, Mustafa B.; Berber, Aykut (2022). "Racialised professionals' experiences of selective incivility in organisations: A multi-level analysis of subtle racism". Human Relations. 75 (2): 213–39. doi: 10.1177/0018726720957727 .
  18. ↑ Beale, Diane (2001). "Monitoring bullying in the workplace". In Tehrani, Noreen (ed.). Building a culture of respect: managing bullying at work. London: Routledge. pp. 77–94. ISBN   978-0-415-24648-4.
  19. ↑ Rayner, Charlotte; Hoel, Helge; Cooper, Cary L. (2002). Workplace bullying: what we know, who is to blame, and what can we do?. London: Routledge. ISBN   978-0-415-24062-8.[ page needed ]
  20. ↑ Peyton, Pauline Rennie (2003). Dignity at work: eliminate bullying and create a positive working environment. London: Brunner-Routledge. ISBN   978-1-58391-238-6.[ page needed ]

Further reading

Dissertations

Academic papers

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.