June 23, 2010
2. Checklist of mobbing indicators
3. The Bullying Boss [In Academia]
4. Injustice destroys justice...
5. Are they claiming that you are emotionally unstable?
6. Raw Thought: Causes of Conformance
7. Misery of Dysfunctional Meetings
8. Crusade against the jerk at work
9. Effects of Psychological Harassment
11. Ten Signs of an Incompetent [Academic] Leader
12. Why grievance procedures are inappropriate for dealing with bullying
13. Whistle blowing - supporting governance in higher education
14. Complaint against Michael Scott, Universities and Colleges Union Solicitor
15. Identifying the work place psychopath
16. 25 Top Workplace Bully Tactics
17. The Peter Principle in Academe
18. Psychopath Checklist
19. Kingston University witness intimidation
20. The Concorde Fallacy
21. Workplace Bullying - Researchers
22. The Abilene Paradox - Why Team Members Won't or Can't Help
23. Why Does [ACADEMIC] Mobbing Take Place?
24. Avoiding Academe's Ax Murderers
25. Making the Star Chamber Work
26. Workplace bullying and mobbing in academe: The hell of heaven?
27. Workplace Bullying ‘Epidemic’ Worse Than Sexual Harassment
28. Eliminating Professors. A Guide to the Dismissal Process. By Kenneth Westhues
29. Workplace Bullying In Academia: A Canadian Study
30. So you want to know how some universities waste taxpayer money and who the biggest offenders are?
June 16, 2010
“It was like drowning and no one sending you a buoy,” said Edwards, who told her story during a session at the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) conference in Washington, D.C.
The disintegration of civility in higher education is a growing concern for university faculty who say the disrespect has reached epic levels not only between professors and students but also among colleagues. Women and faculty of color are often the targets of mistreatment, but increased competition and societal shifts have demonstrated that no higher education professional is immune. In addition to academic bullying, the incidence of workplace violence is no longer rare in higher education. High-profile cases, such as the February killings of three University of Alabama-Huntsville professors allegedly by a co-worker, were prominent in higher education news this past academic year.
“It’s coming up in many of our sessions,” said AAUP director of communications Robin Burns. “It’s always been a problem, but people are really talking about it now.”
“It’s becoming a more prominent issue,” said Janet Tompkins McMahon, a conference presenter and an assistant professor of nursing who is moving to Towson University from Francis Marion University. “We need to be prepared to deal with this and avoid detrimental consequences that could harm everyone.”
Edwards said she believes the bullying she experienced stemmed from a number of reasons. Prior to the car tampering accusations and other incidents, Edwards had been unexpectedly away eight weeks from her job as an assistant professor at her school’s nursing department after suffering a medical emergency. Her absence had put a strain on the department, requiring five different faculty members to cover her classes, she said. But, as soon as she was able, Edwards returned to teaching.
But things had changed. The once popular Edwards was quickly ostracized by her colleagues and pressured by her supervisor to resign. Edwards, who was on track for tenure and held the only doctorate in the department, was berated in faculty meetings, attacked in evaluations, and publicly denigrated in e-mails, she said.
Matters worsened for her, but Edwards battled the offensive that led to her dismissal from the university. A lawyer, an ulcer, and thousands of dollars later, she won her case in court but was not entirely vindicated.
“Your parents always tell you to fight for what you believe is right,” she said, adding that she has decided to use her experience as a case study for academic bullying and to advise others about analyzing the health of institutions. “But it’s damn hard.”
And for professors teaching the millennial generation, good manners are no longer the norm among students, McMahon said, adding that young people today feel entitled to everything—even grades they don’t deserve. Asking for extra credit, complaining about assignment deadlines, making excuses for incomplete work are characteristic of modern students, she added.
To adjust to her students’ learning styles and remain sensitive to their needs, McMahon characterized them as Wizard of Oz archetypes, which are the confused scarecrow, the insecure Tin Man, the cowardly lion, and the focused Dorothy. Understanding student personalities, she said, helps professors avoid triggering behaviors that could lead to potentially dangerous stress in the classroom.
“Be careful. A house could fall on you,” McMahon said, alluding to the fate of the wicked witch in the Wizard of Oz.
In a 2005 study published in the Journal of Nursing Education, researchers reported examples of increased problematic behavior, everything from leaving class early or sleeping in class to verbal abuse and plagiarism.
Presenters at the AAUP sessions on academic bullying suggested instructors develop standards of practices that are consistent and published clearly in course syllabi with explicit wording that emphasizes strict adherence. If the behavior is not immediately confronted and reported, the incivility could escalate, presenters said.
Paul Howe, a conference presenter and business instructor at Caldwell Community College and Technical Institute in North Carolina, said he believes the audacity of his students’ excuses and classroom behavior is tied to the societal emphasis on consumerism.
“Students often ask me why they aren’t passing if they pay for classes and come every day,” Howe said. “They actually think, since they pay, they should get good grades without doing the work.”
June 13, 2010
Two-fifths of further education employees have been bullied at work in the past sixth months, with one in ten reporting violent or physical abuse, according to a report by the University and College Union (UCU).
The incidence of bullying is far higher than in other industries, the union said. And, according to the report, managers and supervisors are responsible for much of the problem.
Overall, 41 per cent of FE respondents to the UCU survey carried out in November 2008 said they had been bullied in the preceding six months, compared with 34 per cent of those surveyed in the higher education sector.
The report, Who Listens? Bullying in Further and Higher Education, compared its findings with those in a survey of bullying across different occupations and industries in Britain in 2000 which found that 11 per cent of people had been bullied in the preceding six months.
But despite the reported incidence of bullying in FE, 69 per cent made no official complaint. Of those who did, 52 per cent who had been bullied by another employee said the response of their institution had been “bad or very bad”.
The report found that 72 per cent of those who had been bullied blamed managers or supervisors, compared with 33 per cent who cited other colleagues, 7 per cent who said it was subordinates, and 6 per cent who blamed students.
The most likely forms of bullying included: being given tasks with unreasonable or impossible deadlines; being given an unmanageable workload; and being subject to excessive monitoring of work.
Other types of bullying included: being humiliated or ridiculed; being asked to do work below levels of competence; gossip and rumours; and having opinions ignored.
Ten per cent said they had experienced violence or physical abuse in the previous six months, with 2 per cent saying they experienced this sort of bullying on a monthly basis. One in ten reported unwanted sexual attention.
The Association of Colleges’ (AoC) employment director, Evan Williams, voiced concern about the sample size of the survey, as only 324 FE employees responded, and said that it was two years out of date. [Imagine that!]
“The agreement on bullying and harassment was drawn up in 2008 and AoC jointly ran roadshows with the unions to raise awareness of these issues among employers and unions,” he said.
Sally Hunt, UCU general secretary, said: “The level of bullying in further and higher education is alarmingly high. With both sectors facing huge cuts and the very real possibility of heavier workloads, it is essential that robust measures are put in place to support staff.”
Nadine Cartner, director of policy for the Association for College Management, representing some 4,000 FE managers, said the association was producing a handbook aimed at addressing the problem.
“Good colleges, by definition, seek to deal with and eliminate bullying through values of respect, openness and courtesy, together with a zero- tolerance approach when bullying occurs,” she said.
From the report:
Lack of confidence in UCU
Didn't believe the UCU would be supportive (others filed complaints & union not very supportive). (HE)
I am scared to use the union as in my experience from a range of colleagues things became worse and UCU were unable to prevent anything so I'm worried that if I make a complaint this will lead to further unjustified intervention in my work and my life at work will be even worse than it is at the moment and the bullying will continue...
...If you have reported any form of bullying from individuals employed by your institution, how satisfactory was the response of your institution to your complaints? Of those in further education who reported any form of bullying from individuals employed by their institution, only 26% said the response of their institution to their complaints was fairly or very good; 52% said the response was bad or very bad. Of those in higher education who reported any form of bullying from individuals employed by their institution, only 15% said the response of their institution to their complaints was fairly or very good; 57% said the response was bad or very bad...
...Have you ever witnessed bullying at work over the last five years? 73% of respondents in further education said they had witnessed bullying at work over the preceding five years, compared with 67% of respondents in higher education...
June 11, 2010
Mediation with this type of individual is inappropriate. Serial bullies regard mediation (and arbitration, conciliation, negotiation etc) as appeasement, which they ruthlessly exploit; it allows them to give the impression in public that they are negotiating and being conciliatory, whilst in private they continue the bullying. The lesson of the twentieth century is that you do not appease aggressors.
The disordered thinking processes of the criminal / antisocial mind are succinctly described in Stanton E Samenow's book 'Straight talk about criminals'. For example:
"Certain people who I term non-arrestable criminals behave criminally towards others , but they are sufficiently fearful [and knowledgeable of the law] so that they do not commit major crimes. We all know them: individuals who shamelessly use others to gain advantage for themselves. Having little empathy, they single-mindedly pursue their objectives and have little remorse for the injuries they inflict. If others take them to task, they become indignant and self-righteous and blame circumstances. Such people share much in common with the person who makes crime a way of life. Although they may not have broken the law, they nonetheless victimize others." (Chapter 8, The criminal mind exists independent of particular laws, culture or customs)
In Samenow's 1984 book 'Inside the criminal mind' he uses this description:
"Some criminals are smooth rather than contentious, ingratiating rather than surly, devious rather than intimidating. They pretend to be interested in what others say. Appearing to invite suggestions, they inwardly dismiss each idea without considering its merits. They seem to take criticism in stride but ignore it and spitefully make mental note of who the critic was. They misuse authority and betray trust but are not blatant about doing so. With the criminal at the helm, employee morale deteriorates. His method of operation sooner or later discourages others from proposing innovative ideas and developing creative solutions." (Chapter 6, Work and the criminal)
June 09, 2010
What is unclear is whether such interventions will make life more tolerable for bullies' victims or leave them feeling more beat up than they were before.
Colleges already frequently use various forms of third-party intervention, broadly known as alternative dispute resolution, to try to keep complaints of unlawful discrimination from turning into costly legal battles. Noting that such disputes often involve allegations of bullying or other forms for workplace abuse, two prominent organizations that provide alternative dispute resolution plan in the coming months to undertake a national campaign to urge colleges to use that same approach in handling complaints of mistreatment that do not necessarily violate any civil-rights laws.
The effort is being led by the American Arbitration Association, a nonprofit provider of alternative dispute resolution based in New York, and by the ADR Consortium, which consists of companies and individuals that offer such services. Also involved is the Institute of Human Resources and Industrial Relations at Loyola University Chicago, which plans to do research on the effectiveness of the approach.
In a paper scheduled for presentation Wednesday at the annual conference of the American Association of University Professors, Lamont E. Stallworth, a professor of human resources and employment relations at the Loyola institute and a founder of the ADR Consortium, and Myrna C. Adams, an organizational consultant who formerly served as Duke University's vice president for institutional equity, argue that alternative dispute resolution offers an "ethical, professional, and cost-effective" way to deal with bullying and other forms of workplace incivility.
By handling bullying complaints confidentially in such a manner, the paper by Mr. Stallworth and Ms. Adams says, colleges can help keep the victims of bullies from developing psychological or health problems as a result of their stress, and can avoid the costs associated with having to replace faculty members who otherwise might quit their jobs in response to the bullying they have experienced or witnessed.
Mr. Stallworth and Ms. Adams acknowledge, however, that they cannot point to any research showing alternative dispute resolution to be an effective means of dealing with bullying. And many experts on bullying argue that what research actually shows is that mediation by some third party is an ineffective means of dealing with bullying, and may even leave the victims worse off.
"There is great consensus about the futility of [alternative dispute resolution] to work with bullying," Gary Namie, director of the Workplace Bullying Institute, said in an e-mail message.
In a September 2009 article in Consulting Psychology Journal, Mr. Namie and Ruth Namie, his wife and partner in running the Workplace Bullying Institute, wrote, "Traditional conflict mediation ignores the targeted worker's need for justice and acknowledgment of the harm" and "focuses only on current and future circumstances, ignoring the past."
"If there is a power imbalance between target and bully, as there often is, mediation can harm the target," they said.
Bully for You
Workplace bullying is a big concern in academe and a source of much misery for some faculty members.
Kenneth Westhues, a professor of sociology at the University of Waterloo, in Ontario, has devoted much of his career to studying "mobbing"—the type of bullying that occurs when a bunch of people gang up on someone—and has found academe to be rife with such behavior. Mobbing, he says, occurs most in workplaces where workers have high job security, where there are few objective measures of performance, and where there is frequent tension between loyalty to the institution and loyalty to some higher purpose. Colleges fit that bill.
The AAUP's annual conference this week has three sessions devoted specifically to faculty bullying. In their paper, Mr. Stallworth and Ms. Adams describe how bullying in academe can take forms other than mobbing, including "regulation bullying," where the victim is forced to comply with unnecessary rules; "legal bullying," which involves using legal action to control or punish a person; "pressure bullying," which involves making unreasonable time demands; and "corporate bullying," in which an employer abuses a worker who cannot easily find another job.
They blame three common features of academic environments—big egos, an individualistic ethic, and tolerance for behaviors not accepted elsewhere—for the prevalence of bullying behavior in such settings.
Bullies and Victims
In a paper scheduled to be presented on Thursday, three researchers from Wilkes University, in Pennsylvania, will discuss the results of a survey that asked faculty members in economics and business about bullying behavior. They found that among such academics, men are more likely to be bullies than women, both genders are about equally likely to be victims, and older faculty members are more likely to be bullies and younger ones to be victims.
The most common type of bullying behavior faculty members engage in, the Wilkes researchers found, is discounting another person's accomplishments, followed by turning other people against their victim, or subjecting their victim to public criticism or constant scrutiny.
The researchers—Jennifer Edmonds, associate professor of statistics and operations management; Dean Frear, assistant professor of organizational behavior; and Ellen Raineri, assistant professor of business—caution that their survey had a low response rate. Just 60, or 2.7 percent, of the 2,200 faculty members they contacted via e-mail responded to their questions, they said, and thus their findings may be skewed by sampling bias.
But a 2007 online survey of more than 7,700 adults conducted by Zogby International for the Workplace Bullying Institute similarly found that, among workplaces in general, men and bosses are disproportionately represented among bullies, and women and people in nonsupervisory roles account for a disproportionate share of victims.
Other survey research by the institute has found that only a small fraction of workers who complain about bullying to their employers feel that a fair investigation was conducted, that they were protected from further bullying, and that their bully suffered consequences. The far more common outcome was for the employer to do nothing and for the victims to be retaliated against and eventually lose their jobs.
The institute's 2007 survey found that workplace bullying was four times as prevalent as discriminatory harassment that is prohibited by law. The organization has been urging states to adopt what it calls the Healthy Workplace Bill, a measure that gives workers who have been subjected to an abusive work environment the right to sue their employers. Since 2003, 17 states have considered such legislation, but none has yet passed it into law. The New York Senate passed such a measure last month, but the State Assembly has yet to vote on it. The bill's opponents include many business leaders and the mayor of New York City, Michael R. Bloomberg.
Among the other nations that have passed laws intended to curb workplace bullying are Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Quebec adopted such a law, called the Quebec Psychological Harassment Act, in 2004.
A key element of the campaign planned by the American Arbitration Association and the ADR Consortium is persuading colleges to adopt anti-bullying policies and codes of civility. That way, although alternative dispute resolution would not be used unless both sides agreed to it, the alleged perpetrator would have an incentive to enter into the resolution process, to avoid facing disciplinary action.
Christine L. Newhall, senior vice president of the American Arbitration Association, said in an interview on Tuesday that many types of dispute resolution could be used in such situations, including fact-finding, binding or nonbinding arbitration, or mediation in which a facilitator tries to bring together both sides. She is confident that well-trained providers of such services can resolve many bullying-related conflicts in academe, just as they settle many other workplace disputes.
"Sometimes the bully does not even know they are a bully," Ms. Newhall said.
Mr. Stallworth is playing a central role in the effort as both a faculty member at the Loyola institute and program director of the ADR Consortium, which he established in 1995. A veteran user of alternative dispute resolution to settle complaints of illegal discrimination, he says he became interested in research on workplace bullying several years ago and has been considering how to apply the expertise of those like him to such conflicts.
If mediation can be used to resolve disputes over equal-employment opportunity, Mr. Stallworth said in an interview this month, "then there is no reason why we cannot structure mediation protocols—or, for that matter, arbitration protocols—to deal with any issues of power imbalance in workplace bullying disputes."
Martin F. Scheinman, a prominent professional arbitrator and mediator who helped set up the Scheinman Institute on Conflict Resolution at Cornell University, said in an interview Tuesday that he similarly sees the potential of alternative dispute resolution to defuse such workplace conflicts in academe, especially in situations where one side may not even be entertaining the perspective of the other.
"When people don't get what they want, they don't say, 'Maybe it has something to do with me,'" Mr. Scheinman said.
Mr. Stallworth said that he and other leaders of the effort plan to invite higher-education associations to join it, and to offer local and regional training to colleges in dealing with bullying and incivility. When problems crop up on campuses, the American Arbitration Association and the ADR Consortium will provide referrals to people affiliated with or trained by them who can provide conflict-resolution services.
The groups involved with the effort plan next year to host a national summit on alternative dispute resolution in Washington. They intend to devote much of the conference to discussions of bullying and incivility at colleges, and plan to invite various higher-education associations to participate.
"I go for anything that works," Mr. Westhues, the mobbing expert at the University of Waterloo, said this month. He cautioned, however, that even the best-intentioned approaches to bullying can backfire. For example, many colleges have been adopting "respectful workplace" or "dignity at work" policies calling for people to be civil to their fellow employees, but he has watched bullies bring frivolous complaints under such policies as just one more means of tormenting their victims.
"From my research, the bottom line that I come to is that there is no substitute in the workplace for adroit, fair management or administration," Mr. Westhues said. If a college embraces alternative dispute resolution but "you have an administration that is basically incompetent or lacks imagination in working out ways for people to live with each other, what you are going to have is an endless series of disputes going to some formal dispute-resolution mechanism."
In an article published in August 2004 in the British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, Patricia Ferris, then a doctoral student in industrial organizational psychology at the University of Calgary, studied organizations' responses to bullying and found that "mediation was frequently unsuccessful due to power differentials between the employee and the bully, inexperience on the part of the person conducting the mediation, and lack of understanding of the differences between bullying and interpersonal conflict." In fact, she said, mediation "was the most damaging response to employees" because they often felt betrayed by organizations that did not provide the help they sought, and ended up seeking more psychological counseling, on average, than people who worked for organizations that either did nothing about bullying behavior or had policies against bullying which they rigidly enforced.
Mr. Stallworth argues, however, that there are many types of bullying behavior and many approaches to alternative dispute resolution, and some forms of mediation do not require the two sides to even have any contact with each other. He said he is confident that the approaches he advocates will be effective in a variety of situations involving bullying in academe, and that they are preferable to the choices the victims of faculty bullies now face.
"So many people have dealt with the consequences of being bullied," Mr. Stallworth said. "We all know how terrible it is to be treated in that fashion."
June 02, 2010
The Times Higher Education article announcing Sir Peter's stepping down as Kingston's Vice Chancellor was swamped with very critical comments from readers highlighting his contribution to workplace bullying. I admit they presented a very unflattering image of the man.
As of today (1 June 2010) all these critical comments have been removed from that blog. What was left is a wash out. Does Sir Peter have a guardian angel?
No, he has expensive legal help that threatens THES with legal action so the latter removed the 'offending' comments and replaced them with the following statement:
- Editor's comment
We welcome free speech but not comments that are libellous, unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable. Any postings of this nature will be removed.
Ann Mroz, Editor
June 01, 2010
When and why do power holders seek to harm other people? The present research examined the idea that aggression among the powerful is often the result of a threatened ego. Four studies demonstrated that individuals with power become aggressive when they feel incompetent in the domain of power. Regardless of whether power was measured in the workplace (Studies 1 and 4), manipulated via role recall (Study 2), or assigned in the laboratory (Study 3), it was associated with heightened aggression when paired with a lack of self-perceived competence. As hypothesized, this aggression appeared to be driven by ego threat: Aggressiveness was eliminated among participants whose sense of self-worth was boosted (Studies 3 and 4). Taken together, these findings suggest that (a) power paired with self-perceived incompetence leads to aggression, and (b) this aggressive response is driven by feelings of ego defensiveness. Implications for research on power, competence, and aggression are discussed...
The present findings highlight the importance of perceiving personal competence when holding a position of power. Power holders who do not feel personally competent are more likely than those who feel competent to lash out against other people. Additionally, the finding that self-worth boosts assuage the aggressive tendencies of such power holders implies the effectiveness of a strategy commonly employed by underlings: excessive flattery. It is both interesting and ironic to note that such flattery, although perhaps affirming to the ego, may contribute to the incompetent power holder’s ultimate demise—by causing the power holder to lose touch with reality.
Full paper at: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~nathanaf/power_incompetence_and_aggresssion.pdf
"Power holders feel they need to be superior and competent. When they don't feel they can show that legitimately, they'll show it by taking people down a notch or two," says Nathanael Fast, a social psychologist at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, who led a series of experiments to explore this effect.
In one, Fast and his colleague Serena Chen, who is at the University of California, Berkeley, asked 90 men and women who had jobs to complete online questionnaires about their aggressive tendencies and perceived competence. The most aggressive of the lot tended to have both high-power jobs and a chip on their shoulder, Fast and Chen found.
To see if a bruised ego can actually cause aggression, the researchers manipulated people's sense of power and self-worth by asking them to write about occasions when they felt either empowered or impotent and then either competent or incompetent. Previous research has suggested that such essays cause a short-term bump or drop in feelings of power and capability, Fast says.
Next, Fast and Chen asked their volunteers to select a punishment to be given to university students for wrong answers in a hypothetical test of learning. Volunteers chose between horn sounds that ranged from 10 decibels to a deafening 130 decibels.
The volunteers who felt the most incompetent and empowered picked the loudest punishments – 71 decibels on average. Workers who felt up to their jobs, selected far quieter punishments, between 55 and 62 decibels, as did those primed to feel incompetent yet powerless.
Flattery seems to temper the aggressive urges of insecure leaders. When Fast and Chen coaxed the egos of these volunteers by praising their leadership skills, their aggressive tendencies all but disappeared. This is proof that leaders are aggressive because of a hurt ego, not simply a threat to their power, Fast says.
This might also explain why leaders of organisations both big and small surround themselves with yes-men and women, he says.
Blind flattery may not be the best solution for the 54 million US citizens estimated to have experienced workplace bullying. But easing leaders into new positions of power, or telling them that it's natural to feel daunted, could prevent future outbursts, says Adam Galinsky, a social psychologist at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management in Evanston, Illinois.