University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

(USC Thesis Other)

Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Workplace Bullying of Women Leaders in the United States
by
Melissa Anne Lally
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
August 2024

© Copyright by Melissa Anne Lally 2024
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Melissa Anne Lally certifies the approval of this Dissertation.
Eric Canny
Douglas Lynch
Monique Datta, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024

iv
Abstract
This qualitative narrative inquiry investigates workplace bullying experiences among women in
leadership roles in publicly traded companies in the United States. Through interviews with
twelve participants, themes emerged regarding workplace-enabled bullying, empowerment to
overcome bullying, and seeking emotional and legal support. Participants described toxic
organizational cultures that fostered suppression, exclusion, and humiliation, perpetuating
workplace bullying. However, they also demonstrated empowerment through sensemaking
processes, self-care practices, and seeking support from HR and legal counsel.
Recommendations include developing robust HR policies, providing leadership training, and
fostering inclusive organizational cultures. Future research should explore profession-based
factors, in-group dynamics, and comparative studies to inform targeted interventions.
Stakeholders are encouraged to prioritize interventions that promote gender equality and create
supportive work environments to mitigate workplace bullying's adverse effects on employee
well-being and organizational dynamics.

v
Acknowledgments
I began my doctoral journey a semester before COVID-19 affected the world. It is
difficult to put into words how much the virtual connections made in class each week
transformed my worldview at a time when the world was also transforming. To my OCL
colleagues, you came into my life at exactly the right moment and I am so awed by your
commitment, grit, and determination to change the world for the better. Thank you for sharing
your stories, your lives, and your hearts and minds. I am already witnessing how you are
changing the world. Fight on!
It is with sincere gratitude that I thank Drs. Deanna Campbell, Eric Canny, and Douglas
Lynch for making the coursework of the program an inspirational joy, even during a pandemic.
We were watching structural changes happen at lightning speed from an urgent need to adapt to
survive. Being able to contextualize that within the frameworks of leadership, change, diversity,
equity, and inclusion opened so many deep conversations and innovations. Your patience,
humor, and willingness to meet the moment meant the world to me.
Last, but certainly not least, to my dissertation Chair, Dr. Datta, your steadfast guidance
and unyielding commitment to quality have helped me put forth a dissertation that I am proud to
defend and publish. Thank you for all the attention to detail and questions you posed as we went
back and forth through all the updates and changes. I am forever grateful to you.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments...........................................................................................................................v
Workplace Bullying of Women Leaders in the United States.........................................................1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ..................................................................4
Importance of the Study ......................................................................................................5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .....................................................5
Review of the Literature ..................................................................................................................6
Workplace Bullying.............................................................................................................7
Organizational Factors Correlated with Workplace Bullying ...........................................11
Gender-Based Workplace Bullying...................................................................................16
Adverse Health Effects of Workplace Bullying on Women .............................................25
Adverse Career Effects of Workplace Bullying on Women .............................................28
Workplace Bullying and Organizational Interventions.....................................................30
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................36
Methodology..................................................................................................................................37
Research Setting ................................................................................................................38
The Researcher ..................................................................................................................38
Data Sources......................................................................................................................39
Participants ........................................................................................................................40
Instrumentation..................................................................................................................40
Data Collection Procedures...............................................................................................41

vii
Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................41
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................42
Findings.........................................................................................................................................43
Participants ........................................................................................................................43
Findings for Research Question One.................................................................................45
Findings for Research Question Two ................................................................................49
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................56
Recommendations and Conclusions..............................................................................................69
Recommendations for Future Research.............................................................................74
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................75
References .....................................................................................................................................77
Interview Protocol .........................................................................................................................92
Ethics.............................................................................................................................................94

viii
List of Tables
Table 1 ...........................................................................................................................................44

ix
List of Abbreviations
NAQ Negative Acts Questionnaire
NAQ-R Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised
SNAQ Short Negative Acts Questionnaire

1
Workplace Bullying of Women Leaders in the United States
Working adults will spend a good portion of their lives at their workplace. This
necessitates interactions with co-workers on a regular basis; some of these interactions will be
negative. There are federal laws in place to protect individuals against extreme forms of negative
interactions that rise to the level of workplace harassment. However, lesser forms of negative
interactions that do not rise to the level of workplace harassment do not receive the same level of
attention. Workplace bullying is defined as a form of interpersonal aggression that can be both
flagrant and subtle but is mainly characterized by its persistency and long-term duration (Salin &
Notelaers, 2020). Work has been done to examine the context of workplace bullying, which
encompasses many of these sub-workplace harassment interactions. However, little of this
scholarship has looked at upward bullying, bullying of women in the workplace, or corporate
culture and values that support workplace bullying. Beyond this, the majority of this work is
being done in the European Union. This dissertation study seeks to provide data for that gap.
There is a limited understanding of gendered workplace bullying in the United States as
experienced by women in leadership positions. Potential causes are understudied, however,
suggested correlations between the strain and the targeting of women include their becoming less
secure in their jobs, having impeded ability to direct their work, and decreasing their productivity
and engagement (Flovik et al., 2019; Glennie et al., 2019; Mastio & Dovey, 2019; Wang et al.,
2015). When women’s productivity and engagement drop, managers and leaders engage in
aggressive behaviors to restore previous engagement and productivity levels, often experienced
as workplace bullying (Baillien et al., 2011; Metin Camgoz et al., 2016). Workplace bullying is
distinct from workplace discrimination, which is bound and prohibited by federal law. However,
there are nuances in the experience of workplace bullying based on different social statuses

2
including gender and race. What workplace bullying looks like for women is different than it is
for men; women experience more social isolation, discrediting of their work, and psychological
abuse more frequently than men who report experiencing more work-related bullying (Attell et
al., 2017; Salin & Hoel, 2011, 2013). Other differences for women include an increased
likelihood of experiencing workplace bullying upon promotion to managerial positions, as
opposed to men who report experiencing more workplace bullying when in non-managerial roles
(Salin & Hoel, 2013). In addition to career challenges, workplace bullying leads to negative
health consequences for women (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). Despite these findings, little is
known about the intersection of women in leadership and workplace bullying. Beyond that, there
were few workplace bullying studies set in the United States at all.
This study aims to understand the workplace bullying experiences of women in
leadership in publicly traded organizations in the United States. This field-based study focuses
on recruiting participants who worked at companies traded in the NYSE or NASDAQ stock
markets in the United States to control for both national and capitalist cultural differences. This
problem is critical to address for several reasons, including the potential detrimental effects of
workplace bullying on women leaders’ health and careers.
Context and Background of the Problem
Workplace bullying is a common and harmful workplace phenomenon. Approximately
15% of employees report being the target of workplace bullying, while 40% have witnessed it
(Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018; Salin & Notelaers, 2018). Another study posited that 50% to 70% of
workers have been victims or witnesses of workplace bullying (McKay, 2014). Individuals who
experience workplace bullying report feeling stress, frustration, anger, demoralization,
powerlessness, anxiety, exhaustion, self-doubt, loss of self-esteem, depression, inability to
concentrate, and fear, as well as having sleep disturbances, post-traumatic stress disorder, mental

3
health issues, and psychosomatic symptoms (McKay, 2014; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012; Spagnoli
et al., 2017). Exposure to workplace bullying has been linked to diabetes, cardiac issues, and
suicides (Xu, 2018, 2019). Additionally, when workplace bullying occurs, the organization is
damaged by impaired mental wellness, deteriorating physical health, and decreased morale of its
employees (Feldblum & Lipnic, 2016; Housman & Minor, 2015; McKay, 2014). Workplace
bullying is damaging and expensive for organizations not to address and remediate.
Workplaces have evolved over the last few years due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the
increase in remote work, and other attitudinal and policy shifts. However, very few studies have
looked at the impact of COVID-19 on workplace bullying (Ciby & Sahai, 2023; Ikeda et al.,
2022). The limited number of studies available on this intersection highlight another gap in
knowledge. While this dissertation is not specifically examining the effects of COVID-19, the
impact of remote work, or other shifts, the incidents being investigated will have occurred during
this transitional time.
In the United States, those in higher authority and power positions within organizations
are predominantly White males (Campuzano, 2019; Cook & Glass, 2014). One study noted 83%
of bullies were in leadership positions (Lewis & Gunn, 2007). Because unequal power dynamics
play a role in the emergence of workplace bullying, the resulting gender disparities in leader-tofollower demographics may create an environment where women are more vulnerable to
perceived or de facto workplace bullying (Fox & Stallworth, 2005; McCord et al., 2018; Omi &
Winant, 2015; Winter, 2015). Addressing gender-based power disparities and access to power
within organizations is a complicated issue that many publicly traded companies have struggled
with for decades and is unlikely to be something they are willing to tackle. When faced with
workplace bullying, women are more prone to accepting harassment and less likely to take

4
assertive action or report it, unlike men, who tend to resist reporting, confrontation, or escalation
actively (Attell et al., 2017). This observed "silence" among women may perpetuate an
organizational equilibrium that reinforces male dominance and the exercise of managerial
authority through coercive means, which may be experienced as workplace bullying (D’Cruz &
Noronha, 2014; Sue, 2005). However, a better understanding of the experiences of women in
managerial positions who experienced workplace bullying is underdeveloped. Having this
understanding may be productive in establishing better organizational support.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
This study aims to understand the workplace bullying experiences of women in
leadership in publicly traded companies in the United States. For the context of the study, the
definition of women in leadership are women who hold managerial positions within these
publicly traded companies. Women in managerial positions are typically people managers and
have responsibility for achieving specifically defined and scoped objectives. These managerial
positions may be middle management up through executive management, including CEOs. The
higher the level of the managerial position, the fewer women there are in these roles. In a recent
Pew Research report, women in CEO positions reached an all-time high of 10.6% (Schaeffer,
2023). By defining leaders for the purpose of this research as occupying a managerial position, it
opens the potential to capture women’s leadership experience across the organizational spectrum
with the hope of understanding differences in experiences of workplace bullying in different
levels of leadership. The goal is to use the data collected to better understand women leaders’
experiences of workplace bullying and assess the broader implications for organizational
dynamics and gender equality. This study aims to contribute to existing literature by providing
current descriptions of women’s experiences of workplace bullying in the United States. The
questions explored in this study are:

5
1. What are women leaders’ experiences of workplace bullying in publicly traded U.S.
companies?
2. How have women leaders engaged in sensemaking of their workplace bullying
experience?
Importance of the Study
Women leaders who undergo workplace bullying often endure psychological abuse,
simultaneous erosion of their social support networks, and discrediting their work (Attell et al.,
2017). This hostile work environment affects their health, leading to adverse consequences
(Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). Nevertheless, little research has been done on the experiences of
workplace bullying among women in leadership roles within companies in the United States. An
early study identified that this phenomenon intensifies at the senior management level, where
16% of female senior managers have reported being subjected to workplace bullying (Davidson
& Cooper, 1992). This escalating pattern could be attributed to socially constructed gender
norms, which often relegate women to subordinate organizational roles (Roscigno et al., 2009).
In light of these complex dynamics, it is imperative to delve into the experiences of workplace
bullying among women leaders in the United States, shedding light on the factors contributing to
their vulnerability, their responses to such adversity, and the broader implications for
organizational dynamics and gender equality within the workplace.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study seeks to explore the experiences workplace bullying of women leaders. An
approach inspired by grounded theory, beginning with the data, and developing theoretical
understandings iteratively during the data gathering and analysis process, will guide
interpretation (Glaser, 2002). Qualitative research allows the researcher to capture insights from
participants' lived experiences in a narrative form. In this study, interviews were the primary tool

6
for collecting data. Participants were recruited through online advertisements in professional
spaces seeking self-identifying women leaders who experienced workplace bullying in the past
five years in publicly traded U.S. companies. Studying workplace bullying as experienced by the
targets of said bullying is best served by listening to the narratives of those who have had them.
As such, qualitative research was selected as the primary methodology and an iterative,
interpretative framework is used to understand the data gathered from this study.
Review of the Literature
Workplace bullying is an underreported and essential issue affecting many employees.
Women in leadership positions within organizations are more vulnerable to experiencing
workplace bullying from multiple directions, downwards, peer-to-peer, and upwards; however,
limited data addresses all three factors. This review covers literature under three research topic
areas: the relationship between workplace bullying and organizational culture, the effects of
workplace bullying on women, and strategies and interventions available to women during
workplace bullying. It should be noted that the authors of the following research have, in some
cases, made claims of factors that correlate workplace culture with bullying that exceed what
their findings show. Therefore, the crux of this argument is that workplace culture and bullying
are related based on those findings and inferences.
Additionally, the articles contained within this literature review focus on in-person
bullying. While digital bullying among remote workers exists, there is not a lot of research on
this topic, and therefore, was not the focus of your review. In this literature review, the gender
distribution of the participants will be identified to further identify the gender disparities in
workplace bullying. This review focuses primarily on the relationship of workplace bullying of

7
women leaders, its effect on women, and women’s attempts to address workplace bullying
directed at them within publicly traded U.S. organizations.
Workplace Bullying
The following section provides an overview of workplace bullying and organizational
factors associated with workplace bullying. The first sub-section will discuss the complexity of
finding a single accepted definition of workplace bullying, as researchers have yet to agree upon
a disciplinary definition. Following this exploration of the complexity of definitions and the
implications for research, the second sub-section will address organizational culture factors
correlated with workplace bullying.
Definition of Workplace Bullying
Researchers have employed a variety of definitions to explain the phenomenon of
workplace bullying. Workplace bullying has been referred to as (a) abusive supervision, (b)
emotional abuse, (c) psychological abuse, (d) workplace abuse, (e) counterproductive workplace
behaviors, (f) undermining, (g) workplace harassment, (h) power harassment, (i) personal
harassment, (j) workplace aggression, (k) mobbing, and other related terms (Ballard & Easteal,
2018; D’Cruz et al., 2014; Einarsen, 2000; Hutchinson, 2012; Nielsen et al., 2017; Nielsen &
Einarsen, 2018; Salin & Hoel, 2013). While each of these authors uses different terms, they
appear arbitrary and lack nuance on differences between the selected terms. Several terms above
are also considered sub-components of psychological aggression (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018).
Incivility is another related concept but differs from workplace bullying, with lower intensity,
fewer violations of work norms, and less deviant behavior (Hodgins et al., 2014). The lack of a
coalesced definition of workplace bullying complicates the research and the reporting of
workplace bullying. For this research, workplace bullying is defined as interpersonal aggression
that can be both flagrant and subtle but is mainly characterized by its persistence and long-term

8
duration (Nielsen et al., 2012). This definition is intended to be broad enough to incorporate the
different elements discussed above.
An overarching definition of workplace bullying could help clarify areas of research as
the prevalence, factors, severity, and duration have been dependent studies based on inclusions
from the researcher’s definition. While the working definition above serves as the beginning of
this project, there is potential to contribute to a more nuanced definition. Researchers have called
for studies to address the lack of definition and cohesion (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018; Salin &
Hoel, 2013). An example of the nuance needed to help develop the understanding of workplace
bullying is the issue of awareness. Hutchinson (2012) made the distinction that some employees
may not realize they are the victims of workplace bullying behavior because of a lack of “shared
meaning” around the topic, noting that not having a common language could lead to confusion
and potentially self-blame. This lack of shared meaning may also complicate research as many
studies rely on self-reporting (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). If participants do not realize what
bullying is at the time, they may be experiencing it without acknowledging bullying as such,
leading to underreporting of workplace bullying as a phenomenon when relying on self-reporting
for information gathering.
While there is no unifying, commonly accepted definition, there is some convergence
around a self-reporting tool for identifying workplace bullying behaviors. Many researchers
incorporate the Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) to determine whether study participants
have been exposed to workplace bullying and the severity of the bullying (Buriro et al., 2022).
The NAQ measures along three dimensions, personal, work-related, and physical intimidation
(Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). This questionnaire does not measure acts of bullying but negative
acts. It does help define what negative acts are, as well as provide data on how those are

9
experienced in the field (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). The intention of measuring negative acts
appears two-fold. First, the negative acts questionnaire is a self-reporting tool that bypasses a
participant needing to understand what they have experienced, categorized as bullying. Second,
by labeling the survey instrument negative acts and identifying the behaviors as negative acts,
the risk of biasing responses from participants by priming their experience as bullying is
bypassed, reducing the risk of eliciting socially acceptable responses. While the survey is a
quantitative measure, it has been formative to how many scholars think about workplace
bullying.
While the NAQ is often used, limitations have been identified for some populations. For
example, marginalized populations may experience negative acts differently. In order to test the
validity of this instrument, Day et al. (2022) used the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised
(NAQ-R) to determine workplace bullying and the Homophobic Bullying Scale (HBS) to
measure bullying behavior motivated by homophobic animus, in a quantitative study of 422
lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) U.S. workers. Both measurement tools identified relationships
between higher levels of workplace bullying, intention to leave, and PTSD. However, the
researchers noted that the NAQ-R may measure a different type of workplace bullying than the
HBS, as the means differed. While no causal relationship was specifically discussed, Day et al.
offered evidence that the NAQ-R and the HBS both provided measures that could be built upon.
Much of the workplace bullying that women experience is not currently captured by more
widely used bullying assessments, including the variants of the NAQ or the HBS, which lack
measurements for assessing subtle negative acts or intersectional experiences of workplace
bullying. The gendered nuances of bullying are not measured in current assessment tools for
bullying. In a 2011 compendium of assessment tools for measuring bullying, the Centers for

10
Disease Control noted that in childhood bullying assessments, girls were more likely to engage
in subtle acts of bullying that the tool did not measure. Further, they concluded that the female
targets of bullying may be underreported through the bullying measures because of this
exclusion. This disparity between undermeasuring women’s experiences of bullying seems to be
affirmed by a 2020 study on gender matters (Rosander et al., 2020). In this article, the
researchers observed that more women than men self-identified as being targets of workplace
bullying, however the NAQ-R and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale identified more men
than women as targets of bullying based on negative acts metrics. This disparity in results
continues to highlight difficulties in capturing women’s experiences of workplace bullying.
Workplace Bullying and the United States
Few studies on workplace bullying were conducted specifically in the United States.
Because of this gap in the literature, international studies inform most of what is known about
workplace bullying experiences. As can be seen in this literature review, not only does research
tend to be nationally siloed, but it is also often multi-focal and idiosyncratic. A key example of
that is the last five projects published by Stale Einarsen and Morten Birkeland Nielsen, experts in
the space, all of which are focused on workplace bullying, but in completely different directions
(Agotnes et al., 2023; Einarsen et al., 2019, 2020; Hamre et al., 2022; Nielsen et al., 2020;
Rajalingam et al., 2021). These directions include workplace interventions for workplace
bullying, prevention of workplace bullying, leadership practices between role stressors and
exposure to bullying behaviors, associations between workplace bullying and insomnia, and an
animal experiment looking at workplace bullying and an increase in the risk of anxiety using a
receptor mechanism (Agotnes et al., 2023; Einarsen et al., 2019, 2020; Hamre et al., 2022;
Nielsen et al., 2020; Rajalingam et al., 2021). This lack of coordination and communication can

11
be detrimental. Additionally, most studies in this space are quantitative in nature, resulting in a
limited understanding of the experience of workplace bullying itself. This study seeks to
coordinate the literature examining women’s experiences of bullying and leaders’ experiences of
bullying alongside their outcomes, tying together three different strands of research that had not
been in extended communication.
Organizational Factors Correlated with Workplace Bullying
Organizational culture can play a role in the safety or hostility of a workplace. Several
studies have evaluated the organizational culture factors correlated with workplace bullying.
First, organizational culture factors are identified. Second, organizational cultural factors
correlated with workplace bullying will be discussed.
Organizational Culture Factors
Findings related to organizational culture factors that contribute to or may be correlated
with workplace bullying have been inconsistent but could provide rich information.
Organizational culture is comprised of many factors. Sarros et al. (2008) delineated seven
organizational culture elements: competitiveness, social responsibility, supportiveness,
innovation, emphasis on rewards, performance orientation, and stability. A limited number of
scholars have built on these elements. One example is the work of Baillien et al. (2011), which
explored the explanatory power of these organizational cultural elements for variances in
workplace bullying in a study of 39 private Belgian organizations. These limited findings
suggested a lower prevalence of workplace bullying exists in organizations with people-oriented
cultures and strong anti-bullying policies (Baillien et al., 2011). While there is some widespread
agreement that organizational cultures have a strong impact on workplace bullying, the
mechanisms by which organizational culture factors work together to create an environment that
supports the emergence of workplace bullying is still being determined, as there is little cohesion

12
in workplace bullying research regarding organizational cultural factors and causal relationships
(Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). The following section explores some of the ways in which
organizational culture has been applied to understanding bullying in the workplace.
Organizational Cultural Factors Associated with Workplace Bullying
Organizational cultural factors have been associated with workplace bullying in many
forms. There is no one unifying set of organizational cultural factors identified by researchers.
For example, in the Belgian study discussed above, cultures with low people orientation and high
performance orientation create an environment that supports workplace bullying (Baillien et al.,
2011). At the same time, in the same study, task-oriented cultures were positively associated
with bullying. Hutchinson (2012), in a study of Australian public sector workers, suggested that
their findings indicated that organizational values like instrumentality, closed-mindedness,
rigidity, individualism, and competitiveness may also be related to workplace bullying. One
throughline here is the association of competitiveness and a high performance orientation, as
Baillien et al. (2011) discussed. Contrary to these two studies, in a large study of municipal
workers, Porter et al. (2018) did not find competitiveness related to workplace bullying. While
there is no conclusion, the scholarship highlights the importance of thinking about the
relationship between competitiveness and workplace bullying in further studies.
Competitiveness is an environmental factor of the workplace, but workplaces can be
conceived of as whole systems. Hutchinson (2012) criticized individualized conceptualizations
from a systems perspective. From a systems perspective, Hutchinson proposed three overlapping
areas of future efforts: organizational risk factors, non-responsive policy frameworks, and
managerial prerogative. However, that systems-thinking approach needed to be followed up with
additional research. Instead, other researchers focused on individualized work environment

13
factors contributing to workplace bullying, including workplace culture, policies and justice
mechanisms, work stressors, and individual leadership styles (D’Cruz et al., 2014; Salin & Hoel,
2013). This individualized focus potentially overlooks some of the larger relationships within the
workplace environment but leaves space to identify organizational cultural elements that may be
protective measures.
Protective organizational cultural elements are described as values around justice, the
perception of fairness, and a culture that promotes congeniality and amity. In a study of primarily
female entry-level employees in Taiwanese hotels, Hsu et al. (2019) determined that two
protective elements that moderated the effect of workplace bullying on employee well-being
were workplace friendship and organizational justice. Of the two, their study discerned that
organizational justice significantly moderated the relationship between workplace bullying and
employee well-being. Where an employee believes there is a strong organizational justice
process and value, there is higher well-being and reduced vulnerability to workplace bullying.
Choi and Park (2019) considered the relationship between a Korean nursing organizational
culture and workplace bullying, finding that a sense of in-group membership and homogeneity
was a protective measure. While in-group membership serving as a protective factor is a
consistent finding across several studies, there is little examination of the ways it could serve to
harm out-group members. Jelavić et al. (2021) ascertained another protective organizational
element was a pro-social and collaborative orientation. Jelavić et al. studied 251 Croatian
predominantly female employees, in the production and construction sectors. The researchers
determined that organizations that promoted collaboration, coordination, and a flexible attitude
to change were correlated with lower levels of workplace incivility.

14
Perceptions of organizational injustice increased exposure to workplace bullying and
employee intentions to leave the workplace. In one quantitative study of 1,024 employees in a
Norwegian transportation organization, 13.5% women, Reknes et al. (2020) discussed an indirect
relationship between injustice perceptions and intentions to leave. Building on earlier work
looking at organizational culture and protective measures, this study evaluated the role of
cultural values around fairness, workplace friendship, and collaboration in moderating, reducing,
or increasing the effects of workplace bullying. This sub-set of organizational cultural elements
was noted to potentially have some explanatory power for bullying reduction but should be better
understood in relationship to other elements of the workplace culture.
Organizational support and perceptions of organizational support are other elements of
organizational culture that have been explored by scholars as potential protective measures
against workplace bullying. Buriro et al. (2022) concluded that organizational support, defined as
organizations that value and care for employees, was negatively correlated with workplace
bullying in a quantitative study of hospital employees. In other words, they brought to light that
the more protective the organization is towards employees, the less bullying was measured. This
relationship was corroborated by the findings of another study of workers in the Pakistani hotel
sector. In this study, Hayat and Afshari (2021) argued that their findings indicated that perceived
organizational support moderates the relationship between workplace bullying and employee
well-being. In each of these examples, the adverse outcomes of workplace bullying were
diminished in organizations with a high level of perceived organizational support. While these
are two limited studies, both based outside of the global north, organizational support emerges as
another potential element of organizational culture to consider in relation to workplace bullying
in further studies.

15
Organizational culture also includes several potentially harmful elements that contribute
to the worsening effects of workplace bullying or support its emergence. In New Zealand,
Glambek et al. (2020) explored the relationship between work group social identification, nonprototypicality of members, and workplace bullying. In this study, with nearly two-to-one
representation of women to men, the researchers observed that there was a three-level crossinteraction where non-prototypical group members were vulnerable to and experienced more
levels of workplace bullying. In predominantly homogenous societies where males typically hold
positions of power, this non-prototypicality of women in leadership positions, especially nonhomogenous women in leadership positions, are visibly non-prototypical and, therefore, more
vulnerable to being targeted for workplace bullying. This implication, while only developed by
Glambek et al. provides a more nuanced way of thinking about the ways that multiple factors
might impact workplace culture negatively.
Authoritarian workplace cultures have also been identified as risk factors for workplace
bullying. In one large Malaysian study, Samsudin et al. (2020) studied the role of organizational
leadership, justice, and climate in workplace bullying. The researchers’ analysis indicated that
high-pressure work environments with close cooperation but little autonomy and limited time for
conflict resolution created the elements to foster workplace bullying. They also posited that
organizations with high hierarchy and a market-focused culture increased vulnerability to
workplace bullying. In a smaller study of the impact of negative workplace culture on workplace
bullying, both perpetrator and target perceptions were evaluated (Pilch & Turska, 2015). The
researchers associated perceptions of chaotic, unpredictable work environments, reduced work
control, role conflicts and ambiguity, work changes, work pressure, performance demands,
interpersonal conflicts, destructive management style, low moral standards, organizational

16
culture, and organizational climate with higher rates of workplace bullying. In both of these
studies, reduced employee control and input contributed to a culture that was receptive to
workplace bullying.
Ineffective people management is another harmful factor that contributes to workplace
bullying. In a small mixed methods study from 25 hospitals in South Australia, Tuckey et al.
(2022) examined the role of people management in relation to workplace bullying. The
researchers identified ineffective people management in several risk contexts, including
managing underperformers, clarifying job roles, and managing interpersonal relationships,
contributed to exposure to workplace bullying at an individual level.
The studies in this sub-section examined a variety of organizational culture elements such
as workgroup dynamics, injustice perceptions, leadership styles, and people management
practices that increase vulnerability or serve as antecedents to workplace bullying. By focusing
on these aspects, the research collectively adds nuance to understanding the workplace as an
organizational phenomenon. While this nuanced examination of elements of organizational
culture in relation to workplace bullying is a good starting point, the studies are from very
different national and regional cultures, and so the findings may not be consistent with what is
observed inside of organizational cultures in the United States.
Gender-Based Workplace Bullying
Studies consistently find that workplace bullying is a gender-based phenomenon. This
association is in line with childhood school bullying (Hamburger et al., 2011). While, the
majority number of the studies included a large proportion of female employees, few of those
considered gender as an analytical variable for understanding the relationship between gender
and workplace bullying (Choi & Park 2019; Glambek et al. 2020; Hsu et al. 2019; Hutchinson
2012; Jelavić et al., 2021; Tuckey et al. 2022). The absence of consideration raises the question

17
of whether there is a distinctively gendered relationship between organizational culture and
bullying. In this section, the current literature regarding gender and workplace bullying is
outlined. This section intends to address studies that query the gendered relationship directly.
First, women leaders and their vulnerability to workplace bullying will be discussed. Next,
studies examining women’s responses to workplace bullying will be reviewed. The section will
end with a discussion of the intersectional vulnerability of women of color to workplace
bullying.
Women and Workplace Bullying
Workplace bullying is commonly accepted as a gendered phenomenon, as discussed in
the background to the problem. Empirical studies have consistently demonstrated that workplace
bullying follows a gender-based expression, with women exhibiting a higher vulnerability to
targeting than men (Salin, 2015). This phenomenon was established through research in the early
twenty-first century that indicated positive correlation between gender and the likelihood of
becoming targets of workplace bullying, attributing this trend to societal perceptions of women
holding lower power and status (Roscigno et al., 2009; Salin, 2003; Salin & Hoel, 2013).
Moreover, the dynamics of workplace bullying are observed to vary based on individuals'
positions within the organizational hierarchy. Men tend to encounter heightened instances of
bullying when occupying subordinate roles, whereas women experience an increased
susceptibility to such mistreatment upon ascending to managerial positions (Salin & Hoel, 2013).
While this data is older, the findings are seemingly taken as de facto by more recent scholars of
workplace bullying. For example, in one study of predominantly female Norwegian child welfare
workers, the researchers went beyond simply investigating power dynamics to proscribing a need
to implement preventative and mitigation strategies (Nielsen et al. 2022). This study is but one

18
example of how research treats the critical role of perceived power imbalances in workplace
bullying dynamics as an established issue and moves to future action.
Women’s experiences of workplace bullying have been observed to be nuanced, subtle,
and exacerbated by internalized meaning-making. Workplace bullying behaviors towards women
include fewer negative acts and more social manipulation like isolating the target, assigning
unreasonable workloads, withholding information and resources, giving unreasonable deadlines,
undermining, sabotaging work, publicly criticizing, gossiping, work exclusion, and excessively
monitoring work (Caponecchia et al., 2012; Salin & Hoel, 2013). Minimization is a form of
social manipulation. When social discourse is internalized, individuals may condition themselves
to accept workplace bullying as a work norm. In a small study of Canadian women who were
targets of workplace bullying, minimization played a role in the misunderstanding that they were
experiencing workplace bullying (O’Donnell et al., 2012). Missing context of their own
experience through this minimization, these women reported experiencing irritation, anger, loss
of self-confidence, hopelessness, powerlessness, fear, frustration, and isolation when targeted by
workplace bullies (O’Donnell et al., 2012). In other words, women experience workplace
bullying from every direction, including from inside themselves.
Workplace bullying represents a complex phenomenon that impacts individuals across
organizational hierarchies. Scholarly investigations, dating back to Vartia and Hyyti (2002),
unveiled the multifaceted nature of workplace bullying concerning gender dynamics. Findings
underscore that women's experiences encompass not only bullying from male counterparts but
also from female colleagues. Furthermore, for women, these distressing encounters extend
beyond the boundaries of hierarchical positions involving supervisors, peers, and subordinates.
Parchment and Andrew (2019) delved into the experiences of female nurse managers in

19
healthcare settings in their qualitative study. Notably, more than a third of their participants
reported encountering workplace bullying, primarily at the hands of female executive nurses.
The bullying often followed a downward directional trajectory, underscoring intricate power
dynamics within healthcare organizations. Not only are women targeted from all levels, but they
are also targeting each other, disproving an assumption of gender-based solidarity. In the
Gottenborg et al. (2021) qualitative inquiry centered on ten female division heads within United
States hospital medicine groups focused on the negative acts and aggressions from male and
female colleagues. In particular, one concept discussed was the perceived absence of support,
particularly from female peers, during these distressing incidents. Potential reasons for the
absence of support include fear of reprisal for interceding, lack of support for bystanders, and a
lack of awareness that workplace bullying is occurring as it often happens in individual
encounters (Jönsson & Muhonen, 2022). In each of these examples, leaders and managers
experienced bullying and the lack of solidarity through a gendered lens.
Findings indicate that more minor perceived power imbalances are associated with
reduced self-identification as victims of workplace bullying and a heightened intent to disengage
from the work environment where such misconduct prevails. Patterson et al. (2018) qualitatively
examined leaders' experiences, primarily women, of being the target of upward bullying. They
determined that over time, workplace bullying significantly erodes the managerial resilience and
perceived authority of women in leadership roles. This erosion frequently precedes a perceived
loss of legitimate power, stemming from inadequate support from senior management or a
decline in respect for their authority. In response, subordinates engage in further inappropriate
behaviors, resulting in complaints and grievances. Female leaders grappling with these behaviors
undergo a profound sense of powerlessness, intensifying their perceived loss of authority. This

20
power imbalance often precipitates self-doubt and introspection regarding their influence.
Notably, Patterson et al. illuminates a phenomenon wherein bullying behaviors transcend
individual interactions to permeate organization-wide incidents, often influenced by referent
power dynamics. Additionally, gender dynamics emerge as a notable facet of upward bullying,
evidenced by the preponderance of female participants and the prominent involvement of female
colleagues as primary perpetrators. In conclusion, this review highlights some of the diverse
perspectives on workplace bullying experienced by women across organizational contexts. This
review underscores the intricate interplay of gender dynamics, power imbalances, and the
multifaceted consequences of workplace bullying on women in various managerial roles.
Women’s Responses to Workplace Bullying
Several studies examining workplace bullying posit that women respond to workplace
bullying by engaging in avoidant behaviors. Whereas men may choose to confront their bully,
women will initially tend to avoid labeling the behavior as workplace bullying, instead
ineffectively seeking to remedy it by changing their own behavior (O’Donnell et al., 2012;
Rosander et al., 2020). When women did identify bullying behaviors, they responded by
engaging in self-blame, attempting to appease the perpetrator, avoiding the perpetrator, and
finally withdrawing from the workplace. In other attempts to distance themselves from
workplace bullying, women often took sick days, hoping to improve their adverse health
outcomes experienced from being the target of workplace bullying (O’Donnell et al., 2012).
Taking sick days was often identified as the penultimate move when facing workplace bullying,
preceding only exiting the workplace permanently.
However, taking sick days did not improve the situation, as workplace bullying was still
present when the target returned to work (Nielsen et al., 2020; O’Donnell et al., 2012). Rather

21
than helping women heal, taking time away from work seemed to compound the adverse effects
of bullying, as women reported feelings of guilt and shame when taking time away to deal with
the harmful effects of workplace bullying (O’Donnell et al., 2012). In one study, the final
outcome of failed responses to workplace bullying mostly resulted in the target leaving the
organization voluntarily or involuntarily (62% of the time) or being transferred to a different
work unit (15% of the time) (Namie, 2021). A theorized explanation for this compounding
ineffectiveness in sick leave rests in the concept that exposure to workplace bullying can result in
a shattered worldview.
In a large quantitative study of predominantly female Norwegian employees, Nielsen et
al. (2020) investigated the gendered protective link between supervisor, colleague, and non-work
support for targets of workplace bullying who took sick leave. The findings in this study
indicated that that women who did not have work support for addressing workplace bullying and
took sick leave to address the stress and adverse health effects of workplace bullying frequently
continued to hold a shattered view of their worthlessness and the world as a hostile and sinister
place, resulting in inhibited healing from sick leave. Compounding the damage of workplace
bullying and the ineffectiveness of sick leave, some studies have surfaced that productivity is
decreased when workplace bullying targets return to work (Fattori et al., 2015). As shown in
these studies, the potentially rehabilitative measure of taking sick leave does not support
women’s success or recovery from workplace bullying.
More recently, scholarship into the protective nature of psychological empowerment in
the face of workplace bullying has been explored, finding increased intention to leave and less
self-identification as a victim for targets with less power imbalance between themselves and their
perpetrator. In a small quantitative study of predominantly female nurse leaders, Hampton et al.

22
(2019) considered the protective nature of psychological empowerment against the effects of
workplace bullying. Results from this study support an inverse relationship between
psychological empowerment and workplace bullying, with nurses at the lowest level of
leadership having the lowest amount of psychological empowerment. An explanation for this
inverse relationship may be that higher levels of self-efficacy offer a protective effect against
workplace bullying. An implication highlighted by this study is the potential to develop
psychological empowerment in women in leaders of all levels to decrease experiences of
workplace bullying and improve their resiliency in the face of workplace stressors. While many
studies explored attempts at self-protection, this study is one of the few that mentions effective
means of self-insulation from workplace bullying.
Intersectionality and Vulnerability to Workplace Bullying
Workplace bullying of women appears to be different for White women than for women
of color. Both women and men of color tend to frame workplace bullying as a structural and
socially constructed concept of their role as racial individuals within an organization that favors
White leadership (Attell et al., 2017; Hollis, 2022; Omi & Winant, 2015). People of color in
organizations already experience “status-based vulnerabilities” (DiAngelo, 2011; Roscigno et al.,
2009, p. 1563). As a function of ascribed status within their organizations and physical markers
of race and ethnicity, people of color are more at risk for depersonalized bullying (DiAngelo,
2011; D’Cruz & Norohna, 2014; McKay, 2014; Omi & Winant, 2015; Roscigno et al., 2009;
Salin, 2003). In 2023, Hollis published a qualitative study on the singular experience of an
underrepresented minority who endured workplace bullying for over 6 years. Contrary to
previous studies, this study identified a potentially effective intervention to address the
participant's adverse health and career effects. This psychological treatment plan included

23
mindfulness therapy, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) for post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD), journaling, and exercising. Ultimately, however, the participant did
choose to leave the organization, in line with studies on the targeting of workplace bullying and
intent to leave, which will be covered in a later sub-section (Glambek et al., 2014; Iyer et al.,
2023a; Reknes et al., 2020; Srivastava & Agarwal, 2020). This limited study is the only example
of an intervention-focused study regarding bullying and intersectionality.
Recent scholarship on underrepresented minority women and workplace bullying is
minimal. When this literature review was conducted, Hollis’ work was notable for centering the
Black woman’s experience of workplace bullying. In her quantitative study of predominantly
higher education professionals, Hollis (2018) observed that there is an increased vulnerability to
being targeted for workplace bullying with increasingly complex intersectionality. She
concluded that more than half of all participants reported workplace bullying, but with instances
rising with each subaltern status. In other words, just under half of all women reported workplace
bullying but more than half of all Black women reported workplace bullying, almost two-thirds
of Black women in the religious minority, and one hundred percent of LGBQ experienced
workplace bullying. In a later study, Hollis (2022) performed mixed methods research on 201
female faculty from 45 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) across 15 states.
Hollis validated targets of bullying engaged in avoidant behaviors consistent with earlier nonintersectional studies (O’Donnell et al., 2012; Rosander et al., 2020). Another finding was a lack
of accountability within the organization related to stopping perpetrators of workplace bullying,
which aligns with findings discussed in a later section about interventions. Additional themes
identified included pervasive sexism and racism in the participants’ experiences of workplace
bullying. Similar to non-intersectional studies, the women who participated in Hollis’ study

24
reported experiencing adverse health effects, including anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances,
weight issues, hair loss, seizures, and premature birth. What differed from previous studies was
the level of targeting and the severity of the experience of workplace bullying. Hollis’ work
suggests that the more vulnerable a woman, particularly a woman of color, is, the more
disproportionally she is targeted. This vulnerability has substantial implications for diversity
initiatives for organizations that recruit, retain, and develop women of color as leaders. To date,
Hollis appears to be the only academic expert focused on how workplace bullying affects women
of color.
Similar to research on underrepresented minorities, the relationship between identifying
as LGBTQ+ and becoming the target of workplace bullying is understudied. A limited number of
studies on lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) workers exist, but none specifically focused on
transgender workers were identified. In a recent quantitative study of LGB employees’
experiences of workplace bullying, Hoel et al. (2022) found they were significantly more likely
to be bullied at work. These participants experienced more exclusionary behaviors, akin the
experiences of women in prior studies (Caponecchia et al., 2012; Hutchinson, 2012; Salin &
Hoel, 2013). They also experienced more sexually explicit behaviors and intrusive behaviors.
Being open about their sexual orientation did not increase the likelihood of becoming a target;
however, it did for those workers who only disclosed their orientation when asked. The
implications of this phenomenon need further investigation. How workplace bullying plays out
for LGB workers implies stereotypes and sexualization of LGB employees may play a role in
their selection for workplace bullying targeting. In another quantitative study of LGBTQ+
experiences of workplace bullying, Heiderscheit et al. (2022) ascertained that LGBTQ+ general
surgery residents experienced more workplace bullying than their heterosexual peers. While no

25
marked differences emerged related to perceptions of the learning environment, job satisfaction,
or burnout, there were higher intentions of leaving the program and of suicide. The higher risk of
suicide was eliminated when adjusted for mistreatment. Attending surgeons, considered in
leadership positions within healthcare organizations, were the most frequent perpetrators of
workplace bullying on LGBTQ+ surgical residents. The most common bullying behaviors
included repeatedly reminding the target of errors or mistakes, shouting at or targeting
spontaneous anger at the target, and persistently criticizing the work or effort of the target.
Overarchingly, studies focusing on workplace bullying and LGBTQ+ populations are in
the nascent stage. The complexity, specificity, and relationships between factors in studies
focused on non-LGBTQ+ experiences are far more advanced and nuanced. Additional research
on these vulnerable populations may provide more understanding of their experiences, better
identification of risk factors for becoming a target, more precise career impacts, other protective
measures, and specific interventions that may better support them.
Adverse Health Effects of Workplace Bullying on Women
Workplace bullying is correlated with the deterioration of women’s health. While most
studies focus on the deleterious effects on mental health, the adverse impact on physical health
has been considered in limited studies. The first sub-section will discuss the limited studies on
adverse physical health effects of workplace bullying on women. The second sub-section will
discuss the studies on adverse mental health effects of workplace bullying on women.
Adverse Physical Health Effects of Workplace Bullying on Women
A handful of researchers considered the role of workplace bullying and its adverse effects
on the physical health of targets. In a large quantitative study of adults aged 40-65 from Sweden
and Denmark, 58% female, Xu et al. (2018) evaluated the relationship between exposure to
workplace bullying and developing Type 2 diabetes. The study correlated experiencing

26
workplace bullying with a 1.46 times higher risk of developing Type 2 diabetes compared with
non-bullied workers, even after adjustment for age, sex, educational level, marital status, country
of birth, and alcohol consumption. Xu et al.’s study is not the only one assessing the impact of
workplace bullying on health.
This team’s interest in the correlation between bullying and negative health effects
carried onwards. In a large multi-cohort prospective study, Xu et al. (2019) queried the
relationship between exposure to workplace bullying and the development of cardiovascular
disease, including coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. Exposure to workplace
bullying was determined to be associated with a 59% higher risk of developing cardiovascular
disease. In a quantitative cross-sectional study of Japanese residents aged 20-60, Tsuno et al.
(2022) analyzed the relationship between workplace bullying exposure and physical health
deterioration. The findings suggested physical complaints and physician-diagnosed respiratory
diseases were significantly associated with exposure to workplace bullying. This study further
connected exposure to workplace bullying with reported perceptions of poorer work performance
and more sickness absence days than non-targets from the deteriorating health effects. These
studies on workplace bullying, while each rooted in different national cultures and spread across
industries, all indicate a significant association between exposure and deleterious health
outcomes. Additional research in this space is needed to further explore this correlation.
Adverse Mental Health Effects of Workplace Bullying on Women
The predominant focus in research on health and well-being related to workplace
bullying focuses on mental health. Research on workplace bullying and its impact on mental
health has consistently demonstrated that exposure is associated with adverse mental health
outcomes. Tsuno et al. (2022) noted that exposure to workplace bullying was associated with

27
psychological distress and physician-diagnosed mental illness, whether as a target or witness.
While Tsuno et al. focused on targets and witnesses, other studies frame the issue as exposure
with less granularity. In a large qualitative study of outpatient clinic patients in Norway,
Aarestad et al. (2020) examined the prevalence of exposure to workplace bullying in patients
seeking treatment for depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders. The study identified that
patients exposed to workplace bullying experienced more major depressive disorder, symptoms
of anxiety and depression, and substance use than non-targeted individuals.
Gender had an intersecting impact on workplace bullying and mental health, in some
studies. For example, in a quantitative study of 1,096 Swedish employees, 57% women,
Rosander et al. (2020) examined the relationship between gender and self-labeling as a target of
workplace bullying. Exposure to workplace bullying was associated with more subsequent
mental health issues for women, while self-labeling as a target of workplace bullying was not
associated with increased mental health issues for women, indicating that awareness of the
targeting did not further impair mental health issues. In a follow-up longitudinal study by
Rosander et al. (2022), the same population was examined to understand the impact of one’s job.
Results indicated that changing jobs significantly reduced exposure to workplace bullying and
decreased mental health problems, while mental health issues persisted for those who did not
change jobs. The studies on women’s mental health related to workplace bullying and the
protective measures for women, such as psychological empowerment, do not speak to each other.
Research into this space might provide insights for further mental health support.
Research into effective interventions to improve mental well-being has been limited. A
2022 qualitative study of outpatient clinic patients in Norway, investigated the effect of mental
health interventions on improving the mental well-being of workplace bullying targets (Aarestad

28
et al, 2022). Integrating work-focused scenarios into standard treatment content for Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy or Metacognitive Therapy showed improvements in the mental health of
patients exposed to workplace bullying, leading to improved return-to-work outcomes. This
study highlighted important implications for mental health providers in supporting the return to
health and work for targets of workplace bullying.
The studies on workplace bullying and mental health provide valuable insights into the
damaging relationship between exposure and deteriorating mental well-being. They also suggest
one potential place for intervention. The limited selection of studies, primarily focused on
Norwegian mental health patients, limits the analytical utility of these studies. However, they do
indicate areas worth considering. Further research in support of interventions for mental health is
needed.
Adverse Career Effects of Workplace Bullying on Women
Recent scholarship on the career effects of workplace bullying has focused mainly on
long-term sick absences, work-related stress, burn-out, and intention to leave. As discussed, sick
absences can be protective measures. However, real physiological illnesses can have workplace
bullying as a stressor. Burr et al. (2022) studied private-sector German employees to evaluate the
relationship between workplace bullying and long-term sickness absence. The study found that
the severity of the bullying was positively correlated to the risk of long-term sickness absence.
Sickness is not the only long-term impact. Iyer et al. (2023b), identified that participants
experienced negative career impacts from being the target of workplace bullying. This mixed
methods study determined that negative career impacts included role changes, job changes,
slowed or derailed career advancement, defamed character or professional reputation, and
negative influence relationships with colleagues. While there is a known relationship between

29
workplace bullying and negative career impacts, the research into the underlying mechanisms is
limited or absent.
One well-studied impact of workplace bullying is the intention to leave. Earlier studies
provided additional examples supporting women’s intention to leave in response to negative acts,
a better measured category that is frequently a major part of workplace bullying. One of the
negative acts of workplace bullying is exclusion from work. When women were excluded from
work and could not do the work assigned because of workplace bullying, their work performance
was negatively impacted (Glambek et al., 2014). This exclusion ultimately resulted in women
leaving the company either through frustration at the inability to achieve work goals or being
stigmatized for being removed from their previous groups (Glambek et al., 2014; Namie, 2021).
Other studies have evaluated the mediating and moderating effects on intention to leave. Reknes
et al. (2020), considered the moderating relationship of injustice perceptions between exposure to
workplace bullying and the intention to leave in one quantitative study. This evidence suggested
that when the work environment and leadership are perceived as unjust, injustice perceptions
moderate the relationship between workplace bullying and intention to leave. In a similar line of
scholarship, Srivastava and Agarwal (2020) determined that supervisory support mediated the
relationship between workplace bullying and intention to leave. This mediation implies that
while injustice perceptions contribute to the intention to leave, supervisory support for targets of
workplace bullying may reduce the intention to leave. The intention to leave may be related to
emotional exhaustion, often alleviated through perceived support from supervisors, serving as a
mediator of the relationship between workplace bullying and intention to leave.
More recent scholarship has identified the negative career impacts of workplace bullying,
including intent to leave. In a small qualitative study of female senior faculty women physicians,

30
Iyer et al. (2023a) identified several adverse work-related effects from exposure to workplace
bullying, including work stress, burnout, and intention to leave. Overall, the implications for the
careers of people exposed to workplace bullying suggest that such exposure has significant
adverse effects on employees’ job intentions and ability to stay productive, impacting their career
progression and job stability. However, again, studies are industry specific and regionally
diverse, not controlling for regional or profession-based differences. This is another space in
which the data is currently insufficient.
Workplace Bullying and Organizational Interventions
The following section will address organizational interventions available to women for
addressing workplace bullying. First, the role of HR professionals in managing workplace
bullying incidents will be examined. Second, the importance of well-crafted policies and codes
of conduct that establish clear expectations and consequences will be reviewed. Finally, within
internal interventions, the crucial role of bystanders and their potential to impact intervening and
preventing workplace bullying situations will be considered. These topics contribute to a
comprehensive understanding of organizational interventions for combating workplace bullying.
Human Resources as an Organizational Intervention
Recent scholarship on the effectiveness of Human Resources (HR) as an intervention
mechanism has been limited. However, several researchers have examined the multi-faceted
approaches taken by HR professionals in fulfilling their responsibilities related to the prevention
and management of workplace bullying. In a small study of HR professionals in Australia,
Djurkovic et al. (2021) investigated their roles in managing workplace bullying. The study
revealed a certain degree of ambiguity and vagueness surrounding HR professionals’ awareness
of their roles in addressing workplace bullying, with their roles being situation-dependent and
focused on safeguarding the organization's interests.

31
There was less vagueness when HR professionals were asked about actions that prevent
or manage workplace bullying. The vagueness mentioned by the participant HR professionals in
their roles in addressing workplace bullying is problematic. Perhaps further studies will help
clarify ways in which HR interventions might be useful. For example, in another study about HR
professionals’ beliefs, Salin et al. (2020) gathered information identifying ways in which HR
professionals believed their interventions and other actions could prevent workplace bullying.
These actions included (a) several pieces of training to raise awareness, (b) crafting anti-bullying
policies and codes of conduct, (d) providing good and constructive leadership, (e) promoting a
culture of dignity and respect, and (f) communicating an ethical climate with reporting
mistreatment. Moreover, in the same study, HR professionals believed investigations,
disciplinary action, prompt action, and reconciliation and mediation (21.0%) stopped workplace
bullying. While the HR professionals identified means they felt would stop workplace bullying,
identifying who should take those actions was absent from the participant responses and the
study findings. The absence of responsibility reflected the earlier findings around role ambiguity.
Alternatively, an explanation could be that HR professionals believe these actions would
prevent or manage workplace bullying; however, they expect management, executives, or
individuals to take these actions. Djurkovic et al. (2021), for example, observed that HR
professionals believe themselves to be most effective when drafting and owning behavioral
guidelines and policies. In another study of Australian HR professionals, Rae and Neall (2022)
studied the actions taken to address workplace bullying to understand how HR professionals
were influenced and how they attributed responsibility for WPB. One key finding was that HR
professionals exhibited a bias towards targets of workplace bullying who did not attempt to
confront the perpetrator before escalating the situation to HR.

32
The problematic nature of HR’s requiring confrontation is that confrontation itself is
more likely to provoke further acts of workplace bullying rather than resolve it. Women are less
likely to confront perpetrators of workplace bullying because of existing power imbalances (Rae
& Neall, 2022). Furthermore, Sheehan et al. (2020) identified that employee outcomes associated
with workplace bullying were adversely affected when employees perceived ineffective
implementation of intended anti-bullying practices by HR. These findings are of concern as they
highlight a notable disparity among HR professionals regarding their understanding and clarity
of their roles in preventing and managing workplace bullying. While there is more precise
awareness of actions that may effectively address workplace bullying, there appears to be
ambiguity surrounding HR professionals’ specific responsibilities, with some suggesting that it is
primarily a business problem between two individuals. Moreover, the findings indicate gaps in
HR professionals’ comprehension of the dynamic nature of workplace bullying, the factors that
render individuals vulnerable to such mistreatment, and an inclination toward biased attribution
of blame towards targets who refrain from directly confronting their bullies to cease their
negative behaviors. However, there is little data on how employees perceive HR’s approach and
understanding of who bears the burden.
Organizational Policies as an Organizational Intervention
Organizational policies to prevent and manage workplace bullying are necessary, but not
expected to entirely ameliorate workplace bullying. Hayat and Afshari (2021), in a mostly male
quantitative study of the Pakistani hotel sector, found that organizational support played a
mitigating role in workplace bullying and employee well-being, calling for the establishment of
policies and procedures to help create an employee well-being focus within the organizations as
a protective measure. Lockhart and Bhanugopan (2020) reviewed perceived organizational

33
support for addressing workplace bullying in an online survey of Australian workers. This study
identified that while robust anti-bullying policies existed within the participants’ organizations,
the policies were perceived as merely tokens, not supported by adequate management action.
Some participants acknowledged that following the organizational policy and reporting
workplace bullying was not only inadequate but, in some cases, offered more support to the bully
than the target. Similarly, Hodgins et al. (2020) observed limited or no confidence in
organizational policies that address workplace bullying and establish and maintain dignity at
work. The Irish Workplace Bullying Survey, indicated that the culture overrode policies,
sometimes leading the target to resign or for a senior manager to arrange for a workaround to the
policy by creating a situation where the target resigned, a phenomenon more commonly known
as constructive discharge (Hodgins et al., 2020). In summary, these studies find perceptions of
unenforced or weak organizational policies contribute to workplace bullying. Studies on
effective organizational policies and interventions are limited.
These studies demonstrate the challenges employees face in addressing workplace
bullying as policies may exist. However, the data existing to study this is limited in number and
of varying quality. Samples from Pakistan and the United States may not have shared corporate
cultures, for example. Additionally, this data was not collected with gender as a unit for
comparison.
Bystanders as an Organizational Intervention
Bystander intervention has received some focus by researchers. Several researchers have
focused on the role of bystanders in workplace bullying, their potential actions, and factors that
influence whether they intercede when witnessing workplace bullying (Katz, 2018). Thompson
et al. (2020), in a mixed-method study of UK national health service organizations, considered

34
the styles of support roles bystanders used toward targets of workplace bullying, categorizing
them as emotional, evaluative, informative, and instrumental. Similarly, in a large quantitative
study of physicians, nurses, and assistant nurses in Swedish healthcare organizations,
respondents indicated workplace bullying witnesses can take on different bystander roles,
including assistant, which participates in the workplace bullying, outsider, which observes and
does not intervene, and defender, which defends the target (Holm et al., 2023). This data
indicated that the types of bystander roles taken could be read as associated with work
engagement, with defenders correlated with greatest engagement, and outsiders with the least.
While this is one study, it indicates that organizational culture is perceived as being enacted
through bystander roles, which could make a difference when it comes to workplace bullying.
Several studies exposed organizational culture shapes bystander roles. Passive
engagement of staff members highlighted the organizational culture’s social power as well
(Jönsson & Muhonen, 2022). Participants attributed bystander passivity to fear of negative
consequences, failure to make sense of what was occurring as workplace bullying, working in an
organization where workplace bullying behavior was accepted, and the bystander not being a
member of the dominant group within the organization. The study suggested that for bystander
interventions to be successful, the organization must identify workplace bullying as an important
issue, address and prevent it, and show support for both workplace bullying targets and bullying
bystanders. In a Delphi study of 17 U.S. experts in the field of workplace violence and
workplace bullying, Lassiter et al. (2021) supported the policy suggestion of Jönsson and
Muhonen (2022). These experts held that training employees on the types of behaviors that are
considered workplace violence, understanding the company’s policies and how they can stop
workplace bullying, and giving specific examples of workplace bullying behaviors that are

35
prohibited inhibited workplace bullying. The group of experts explicitly stated that expectations
for bystanders should be discussed, highlighting ways in which HR might help shape
organizational culture around workplace bullying.
In addition to understanding how bystanders can show up in different roles to address
workplace bullying, it is also important to understand organizational barriers that may prevent
them from taking on more active roles. Contrary to the studies discussed above, Jönsson and
Muhonen (2022) observed that organizational factors such as dysfunctional organizational
culture and management deficiencies prevented bystanders from taking action. Around the same
time, Thompson et al. (2020) categorized a theme regarding bystander concern and possible
repercussions from supporting the target. Both studies identify the benefits of bystanders
intervening as supporting the target, the organization’s customers, and the organization with
better outcomes. However, the studies also highlight the need for an integrated and supported
organizational approach to workplace bullying and removing organizational barriers that may
prevent bystander intervention. These negative examples of bystander fear help to highlight the
potential barriers the organizational culture and HR may pose.
It is not just organizational barriers that may impede bystander intervention. Personal bias
factors may also play a role. In a vignette-based study of bystander interventions supporting
women experiencing workplace bullying, Meglich et al. (2020) considered the role of the target’s
sexual orientation in fictional intervention scenarios. The researchers concluded bystanders were
less likely to intervene when the target was a lesbian compared to targets who were heterosexual
or bisexual. They surmised that those higher in homophobia and amnestic heterosexism felt less
responsibility to intervene to support the target during workplace bullying. While this one

36
theoretical study does not provide solid evidence, it does seem to directionally support earlier
concepts discussed.
Overall, no effective interventions were identified within the interventions listed
including HR, organizational policies, and bystanders. Most studies highlight the ambiguity
around accountability for identifying, preventing, mitigating, and resolving workplace bullying
within organizations. The most promisingly effective intervention appears to be paraorganizational, relying on the spontaneous participation of members of the organization to
address the issue.
Conclusion
This literature review serves as a foundation for understanding the complexities and
nuances of this research topic. As discussed, there is no singular definition of workplace bullying
but characteristics are identified in the literature. Organizational culture’s known relationship to
workplace bullying is examined, although many gaps in knowledge still remain. The literature
highlights the gendered dimensions of workplace bullying, with women often facing unique
challenges, such as higher levels of social isolation and psychological abuse than men. As noted
in many of the studies discussed, women were an important part of the study, although the
impact of gender on bullying remained underexamined. The literature revealed disparities in how
men and women respond to workplace bullying. Women leaders may be less likely to report or
confront bullying behaviors, which can perpetuate the cycle of bullying and maintain
organizational power imbalances. Known adverse effects of workplace bullying on health and
career are explored, leaving room for further understanding of nuance. In addition, the difficulty
of organizational interventions was discussed. As such, this project seeks to address the
opportunity to contribute knowledge about workplace bullying as a lived experience for women
managers in publicly traded U.S. companies.

37
Methodology
The previous section reviewed relevant literature on workplace bullying, organizational
culture, and women in leadership. Qualitative research was deemed an appropriate approach to
answering the questions of the study. Grounded theory informed the approach to analysis. This
section provides an overview of the research methodology, data collection and analysis,
limitations, and delimitations.
This qualitative research aims to understand the workplace bullying experiences of
women in leadership in publicly traded companies in the United States. The questions addressed
are:
1. What are women leaders’ experiences of workplace bullying in publicly traded
companies?
2. How have women leaders engaged in sensemaking of their workplace bullying
experience?
Qualitative research is well-suited for this study as it allowed for an in-depth exploration of
workplace bullying phenomena, offering insights into women leaders' lived experiences,
perceptions, and responses (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The study involved collecting contextspecific data through in-depth interviews. These qualitative data collection methods enabled me
to gather detailed narratives and perspectives from women leaders who have encountered
workplace bullying within the unique context of publicly traded companies in the United States.
Open-ended questions and probing techniques encouraged participants to share their experiences
and coping mechanisms. By employing a qualitative approach, this study seeks to provide a
better understanding of workplace bullying experienced by women leaders in the United States.

38
The findings aim to contribute additional insights to the existing literature that could be used to
inform organizational policies and practices within these dynamic settings.
Research Setting
This study was not geolocated nor limited to a single organization. Recruitment materials
were distributed via social media sites: LinkedIn, Facebook, and Fishbowl. The recruitment
materials contained details of the general call for participants and a link to a form where potential
participants could indicate interest in the study and be screened for participation qualification.
Recruitment materials included a graphic designed specifically for each of the social networking
sites in order to provide information about the study. The recruitment screener was created with
Qualtrics and sought to gather demographic data and indicate willingness to participate in the
study. I then contacted individuals and provided additional information, including informed
consent forms and the option to communicate interest in being a participant in the study. Each
interview lasted no more than 60 minutes and occurred virtually with online conferencing
software Zoom.
The Researcher
Acknowledging one’s positionality and bias is important for mitigating its impact
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). For most of my adult working life, I have been employed in
consulting firms, working for corporations as my clients, or as a corporate employee. My interest
in this subject came from my lived experience with workplace bullying. My professional
standpoint comes from the perspective of an employee and a human capital consultant who has
delivered work related to policies and procedures, training for managers and leaders, and as a
former employment law project manager for a corporate employer.
My lived experience comes from the perspective of a middle-class White woman in
leadership who has reached middle age. As a woman, I am aware of experiencing a lifetime of

39
social conditioning about women’s roles within society in the United States. My secondary
identity is related to my visible ethnicity. Being White has afforded me privilege and access to
education and power within society in the United States. I am aware of disparities between my
experiences and my colleagues who occupy different societal spaces. I have both experienced
and witnessed workplace bullying during my career. Workplace bullying was a traumatic
experience for me; therefore, I assume it will also be for the participants. The literature also
supports this assumption (Alessi & Khan, 2023). My professional experience and personal
exposure led me to this study. As a target of workplace bullying, I will have to work diligently to
watch my bias and be careful not to layer over the participants’ responses with my own
experience. One of the strategies I plan to use with the data analysis is self-reflection and selfawareness to evaluate whether I am allowing my biases and experiences to color my
interpretations and findings.
Data Sources
The data sources used for this study were the semi-structured interviews and audio-visual
recordings of the interviews. I used a semi-structured synchronous interview protocol to better
understand women’s experiences, their comfort with using interventions, and their confidence in
those interventions. An interview with good questions had a better likelihood of yielding the
information needed for my research questions than a fully structured interview, which may
disrupt rapport building and short-cut some rich and detailed responses needed to understand
their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Alessi and Khan’s (2023) trauma-informed lens
guides the questions to protect interview participants from potential harm. The interview
protocol was designed with industry recommended standards in qualitative interviewing in mind.
The protocol utilized specific probes to provoke more in-depth answers. The interview protocol

40
also included scheduled pauses and well-being checks to support the mental health of the
participants.
Participants
This study focused on interviewing leaders who self-identify as women, work in the
United States in publicly traded companies, and have experienced workplace bullying in the past
5 years. To reach saturation, this study interviewed 12 women in the positions of manager or
above in U.S. organizations. Sampling was convenience-based, as my network included many
women in publicly traded U.S. companies. Recruitment materials were distributed through my
own network contacts on sites including Fishbowl, Facebook, and LinkedIn. The intention was to
use purposeful sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The sample was limited by participants
recognizing themselves as targets of workplace bullying. Efforts were made to guarantee
confidentiality for participants to mitigate any potential harm to their careers. Materials were
made available to participants after the interview to enable them to access mental health services
and links to NAMI and other supportive measures. After the interview, materials related to
workplace bullying were shared with participants.
Instrumentation
The primary instrument of this qualitative study is the researcher. As Creswell and
Creswell (2018) noted, the researcher collects and interprets data from their interviews. Semistructured interviews include structured questions that may be flexibly sequenced and worded
with prompts to elicit more complete answers (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Following Alessi and
Khan (2023), the questions in the interview protocol began with the “least stressful” and led to
potentially more activating as tolerated by the participant. This semi-structured interview
approach allowed for consistency in questions and the ability to adapt questions to language
tolerable to the participant while maintaining alignment with the research questions, supporting

41
me in capturing targeted information. The framework for interviewing on sensitive topics, as
proposed by Dempsey et al. (2016), allowed for monitoring and addressing distress if it had
emerged during the interview and encouraged flexibility to slow down, encourage self-soothing
and other trauma-informed skills to help support participants’ well-being and health while
discussing the sensitive topic of workplace bullying. The interview protocol included ten
questions on the participants’ history and experience of workplace bullying. A script was utilized
to structure the process for me and ensure the participants were informed regularly that they
could pause, stop, or exit the interview at any given time.
Data Collection Procedures
A semi-structured synchronous interview protocol was used to understand women’s
experiences, individualized personal and environmental influences that affect women’s selfefficacy, and additional resources or support required to address workplace bullying. Twelve full
interviews were conducted between November 22, 2023 and January 11, 2024. Interviews were
spread out due to availability of respondents over the holiday season. Interviewees met via
Zoom, online meeting software, after providing consent via the Qualtrics form and re-verified
consent at the time. I followed the interview script for the semi-structured interviews and
utilized Zoom’s native recording feature to document each interview. Interviews lasted up to 60
minutes. Data was captured through recording and field notes. After each interview, transcripts
were generated and then sent out for interviewee transcript review, in order to provide the
opportunity for correction or feedback.
Data Analysis
At the beginning of data analysis, I used the conferencing software’s native transcription
services. Transcripts were sent back to participants for interviewee transcript review. The
corrected transcriptions were then reviewed and coded, with data categorized into themes

42
manually. Relying on grounded theory to inform my coding, I transcribed and coded each
interview as it was conducted. The primary method of coding was inductive in nature, focusing
on the lived experiences in the words of those who lived them. After coding each interview, I
reviewed to see what new codes emerged. I then reviewed previously coded data to see if those
new codes would add value if applied there. From the codes, conceptualization was revisited to
help understand the lived experiences. From there, categories were developed; from the
categories, the themes emerged that provided insight (Qureshi & Ünlü, 2020).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
For qualitative research to contribute to the knowledge base about the topic, rigor is
necessary so that the findings resonate with participants and those reviewing the study, thus
inspiring the confidence of other researchers (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In other words, the
study must be credible and trustworthy. To improve the credibility and trustworthiness of this
study, I employed several strategies from Merriam and Tisdell (2016). The first strategy was
interviewee transcript review, reviewing the interpretations and initial findings with participants,
and inviting their critique on plausibility. The second strategy was evaluating my positionality
with critical self-reflection on my identity, worldview, beliefs, assumptions, and relationship to
the studied topic. The number of interviews should lend credibility to the themes pulled out and
the commonality of women's experiences during workplace bullying. The number of interviews
collected were specifically set to meet sufficiency for saturation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

43
Findings and Discussion
The purpose of this study was to understand the workplace bullying experiences of
women in leadership in publicly traded companies in the United States. Women in leadership, as
defined in this study, are women who hold managerial positions from middle management to
executive management with the exclusion of CEOs. The design of this study was a grounded
theory inquiry in order to enable an exploratory approach of the women’s lived experiences of
workplace bullying. This study involved a sample of 12 women in leadership in publicly traded
companies in the United States. All of the participants were interviewed individually for data
collection purposes. The data was analyzed inductively and thematically to discover themes that
represent the women’s experiences of workplace bullying. The following research questions
guided this study will be answered in this section:
1. What are women leaders’ experiences of workplace bullying in publicly traded U.S.
companies?
2. How have women leaders engaged in sensemaking of their workplace bullying
experience?
This section contains a description of the research participants. Next, the research findings for
Research Question One will be addressed. Then, the research findings for Research Question
Two will be discussed, followed by a summary.
Participants
The sample of this study consisted of 12 women in leadership in publicly traded U.S.
companies. Self-identified potential participants filled out a Qualtrics survey to indicate interest
in the study. One individual who had been scheduled to be interviewed canceled less than an
hour before the interview due to concerns about the repercussions of being identified as someone

44
who experienced workplace bullying. The fear of discovery, even during recruitment,
highlighted the need to better understand workplace bullying and its long-term effects.
Table 1
Assigned Pseudonym, Self-Identified Ethnicity, Industries, Multi-site bullying (yes or no)
Participant Self-Identified Ethnicity Industries Multi-site Bullying
Abigail Black, non-Hispanic Medical Supplies Yes
Catherine White, non-Hispanic Medical Supplies Yes
Elle Asian, non-Hispanic Technology Yes
Emily Asian, non-Hispanic Financial Services No
Jennifer White, non-Hispanic Professional Services Yes
Jessa White, non-Hispanic Medical Supplies Yes
Kate White, non-Hispanic Technology Yes
Kenzie White, non-Hispanic Technology Yes
Kristen White, non-Hispanic Professional Services No
Matilda White, non-Hispanic Technology No
Megan White, non-Hispanic Technology Yes
Stacy White, non-Hispanic Financial Services Yes
Selected participants of the study had corporate experience in the following areas:
financial services, medical supplies, professional services, and technology. Of those interviewed,
a disproportionate number of women in the technology industry offered their willingness to share
their experience of workplace bullying. The participants covered a wide range of ages, although
all were mid- to senior-level career professionals. Of the twelve interviewed participants, two
were Asian, one was Black, and the remaining nine were White, non-Hispanic. Most participants
were between the ages of 30 and 45. However, two older participants were in their 50s and 60s,
respectively. Nine (75%) of the participants reported experiencing workplace bullying at
multiple employers during their professional careers. By the tenth interview, data saturation had
been reached. Table 1 outlines the participants’ pseudonyms, self-identified ethnicity, industry,
and whether they had experienced workplace bullying at multiple employers throughout their
careers.

45
Findings for Research Question One
The participants’ experiences of workplace bullying included being ‘singled out’, being
discriminated potentially because of their gender, being belittled, and being manipulated. The
participants identified the differences between the workplace bullying by their male colleagues
and superiors and their female colleagues and superiors. The differences emerged as the two
themes which were (a) experiences of men using their perceived authority over women at the
workplace and (b) experiences of women attacking women at the workplace.
Theme 1: Experiences of Men Using Their Perceived Authority Over Women at the Workplace
The participants speculated that their male colleagues’ and superiors’ bullying was
gender-based. The participants experienced workplace bullying from their male colleagues and
superiors particularly in singling them out and in discriminating against them because of their
gender. According to the participants, being singled out as a form of workplace bullying meant
that their bully targeted them specifically. While three participants (25%) spoke about how the
male colleague or superior who bullied them also treated many other colleagues poorly, nine
participants (75%) stated that the male colleague or superior who bullied them specifically
singled them out. The participants explained that their bully made things at work unnecessarily
difficult for them including restricting their opportunities to be promoted, gaslighting them, and
making them look bad in front of others. Catherine shared, “He manipulated me to do the things
he wanted. This is how the politics work. This is how it is here. And then kept promoting every
male around me, and then having me train them.”
Based on the participants’ narratives, experiences of gaslighting included the bully
making others believe a certain narrative despite evidence proving them wrong. The participants
perceived that male workplace bullies engaged in this behavior in order to turn their colleagues

46
against women leaders and gain their colleagues’ favor for themselves. Elle and Emily described
their experiences of being gaslit by their male colleague. The participants spoke against their
bully’s behavior, but the bully’s response was to reverse the narrative and made them think that
they were the ones being difficult. Emily shared, “He was telling me that I was being difficult for
not conforming.” Elle stated how her male colleague used manipulation to bully her: “And when
he didn’t get what he wanted, he threatened me.” Elle’s experience escalated when she continued
to question her male colleague’s behavior. Her male colleague manipulated their co-workers into
thinking that she was the problem, and she was eventually laid off. Elle stated, “He didn’t like
being questioned. And I was basically told that if I didn’t shut up that I would be asked to leave,
and I was asked to leave.” Catherine discussed that a male colleague made others think she was
“crazy.” Catherine recalled how the bully succeeded in manipulating their colleagues and nobody
at the office believed her until she eventually got laid off.
Gender-based bullying also occurred at the workplace as men tended to support other
men, as depicted by the concept of the good ole boys’ club. Kenzie’s experience with a male
superior and a male colleague was more related to nepotism, as her male colleague was wellconnected to the organization’s leaders. However, Kenzie also attributed her experience to being
associated with gender as she shared her perceptions that her male supervisor tended to take the
side of her male colleague in a “good ole boys’ club” manner.
While male workplace bullies tended to treat their colleagues and superiors as equals and
figures of authority, they typically did not recognize women leaders’ rank. The participants
reported experiences in which they were undermined by their male workplace bullies despite
their leadership role. Matilda expressed how a male workplace bully who was her counterpart

47
did not consider them to be of the same status at the organization. Matilda declared, "We were
equals. And he never viewed [us] as equals.”
Perceived gender-based bullying also occurred through experiences of being objectified,
sexualized, and harassed by male colleagues. The participants shared that their male bullies
focused on their appearance and had misconceptions about their skills because they were women.
Kenzie described, “And so they’ll say really anything to make me feel uncomfortable. I’ve had
comments about my appearance or pictures of me, I have been told I lied on my resume.”
Finally, because of their male colleagues’ perceived authority over them, their bullying
behavior involved yelling and intimidation. Catherine shared that her male superior was bigger
and older than her, and he would use his body to corner her and then yell at her in front of others.
Kristen and Kenzie also talked about their experiences of being intimidated by their male
superior through yelling at them in front of others. Male colleagues and superiors tended not to
see women as their equals regardless of their rank and qualifications; thus, they resorted to
bullying to maintain a sense of power over the women leaders. However, the women leaders
expressed their awareness of their male colleagues’ and superiors’ manipulation.
Theme 2: Experiences of Women Attacking Women at the Workplace
The participants’ experiences of bullying by their female colleagues and superiors
involved being belittled and manipulated. Similar to their experiences with male bullies, their
female colleagues’ bullying also seemed to be specifically targeted towards them. The
participants’ experiences of being attacked by other women at the workplace ranged from
microaggressions to outright being challenged. Nonetheless, like male workplace bullies, the
participants perceived that the objective of female workplace bullies was to turn their colleagues
against them and gain the favor for themselves.

48
According to the participants, microaggression referred to the bullies’ nuanced remarks
and behaviors to exclude them at the workplace. Microaggressions, as described by Matilda,
involved subtle and “bothersome” remarks made by other women regarding their skills and the
work they did. The participants described how female workplace bullies exhibited
microaggression through excessively questioning them and criticizing their work especially
when in front of others and behind their backs. Jessa shared, “She just was terrible to me all the
time, super critical. No matter what I did, my work was never good enough, even though I was
far exceeding what my peers were doing.” Most participants described similar experiences as
being challenged so as to make them feel belittled.
The participants also experienced being undermined by their female colleagues,
especially their superiors. In Abigail’s experience, the bully was a superior who “challenged
everything” she did. She was often confronted especially during meetings. Kate described, “She
would just do things that would undermine me in meetings in front of other people.” Stacy
explained that the bullying experience from female colleagues also included hindering their
chances of being promoted. Stacy articulated, “It was the women also. There were several
women in that situation where they, they saw that I was talented and successful, and they wanted
to, you know, squash that.” The participants’ experiences of being undermined and challenged
by female workplace bullies stemmed from competing for promotions and leadership positions.
Female workplace bullies tended to use passive-aggressive methods such as twisting the
narratives or taking the narratives out of context to make themselves look good and the bullied to
look bad. The bullies’ behavior may also be categorized as gaslighting. Kate reported her
experience of reaching her limit in tolerating a female colleague’s bullying. When she confronted
the bully, the bully twisted the narrative and made their supervisor believe that it was her fault.

49
Kate suffered the consequences and was not promoted. Kenzie experienced having a screenshot
of a part of her private conversation with a colleague be sent to her supervisor, which was taken
out of context and used against her. As a consequence, she was reprimanded.
The behaviors of male and female workplace bullies had some similarities and
differences, but the objective tended to be the same. Like male workplace bullies, female
colleagues and superiors who engaged in bullying aimed to be favored by others over the women
they bully. Female workplace bullies were perceived to want favor because they see other
women as a threat to their chances of being promoted.
Findings for Research Question Two
Sensemaking can be contextualized as the participants’ insights about their work
environment, their ways of addressing the problem of workplace bullying, and the support they
have in addressing workplace bullying. The three themes that emerged from Research Question
Two include (a) workplace enabling bullying, (b) gained empowerment to move past being
bullied, and (c) sought emotional and legal support against workplace bullying.
Theme 3: Workplace Enabling Bullying
All 12 participants (100%) described how some elements at the workplace enabled
bullying. One element was the general toxicity of the work environment. The other was the
dismissive response when employees reported workplace bullying experiences. The participants
described their work environment to be “toxic” when suppression, exclusion, and humiliation
were part of the culture. When the participants experienced workplace bullying, they felt
suppressed and could not speak up for themselves. One reason was that the workplace bully had
allies in management or in the HR department. Matilda shared, “We see a lot of cover up of the
dirty… Why is this guy still there? Because he has the network. Why does he have the network?

50
Because he's a good ole boy.” Megan stated, “It was like, such chaos, where now the manager of
the project who is buddies with this sales rep, calls me and goes, just go home.” Elle explained
her experience of reporting her male counterpart for workplace bullying, and the male colleague
retaliated by rallying his team and other men to reverse the narrative and report her for being
unprofessional. Elle was investigated by the ethics team and was later terminated. Abigail
reported her female superior to the HR department, but the HRBP allied with the accused, and
the investigation had no outcomes. Abigail described, “When I filed my official complaint, they
never shared with me the outcome of their investigation, and maybe because they know there's
going to be some potential litigation actions.”
The participants also shared that in their work environment, they were fearful to speak up
against their workplace bully. Jessa and Stacy recognized the problem of workplace bullying and
not speaking up against the bully, but they felt that keeping quiet was the easier option to
continue with their job. Stacy stated, “A lot of times, I would just ignore it and keep on going
and doing what I thought was right. And what was necessary to get the jobs done.” Stacy, as well
as Emily, added that they feared speaking up because they did not want to be perceived as
antagonistic or difficult to work with. Stacy said, “There's more stigma and more bias after those
conversations and got me kind of pigeonholed as troublemaker. You can't get along with others,
you know, a problem person.” Elle and Kristen specifically feared speaking up and then losing
their jobs. Elle shared, “I couldn't stand up for myself, because I was at risk of losing my job or
being seen as being difficult.” Nonetheless, Emily added that the problem of enabling bullying
was not only in the work environment, but also in herself as she had her own insecurities that
prevented her from speaking up. Emily stated, “I feel like there's an element of my own
insecurities, that sometimes makes it harder for me to speak up.”

51
The participants generally described workplace bullies as insecure people who abused
their authority to manipulate others. With this description, the workplace becomes toxic and
enabling of bullying. Stacy reasoned:
What I would consider workplace bullying is any kind of imbalance of power, whether
and kind of the outshot of how the imbalance takes place in the workplace. So, whether I
was more powerful than my superior, or they were more powerful than me, it could go
both ways.
The workplace enabling bullying also involved dismissal of reports against bullying.
Some participants initially intended to address their experience of bullying through confronting
the bully without involving the HR department and the management. However, they were
typically faced with dismissal. Kate shared, “I would try to talk to her about it separately, she
would just be completely silent, and not acknowledge the behavior.” Dismissal of bullying
reports was also attributed to working in male-dominated spaces where male counterparts tended
to be more valued by organizations. Matilda stated, “There's obviously a personality conflict that
is unresolvable between myself and the other [male counterpart] … I don't know why he was
seen as such a valuable resource. But I understood that he was.”
The participants stated that there was generally a lack of accountability measures against
workplace bullying which enabled bullying to occur at the organization. The participants
reported that workplace bullying policies existed but were somehow insufficient. The policies
were often categorized with harassment; thus, bullying was often not taken seriously. Megan
stated, “This is the problem with corporate in my opinion, it's great that they have the systems in
place. But no one takes it seriously.” The policies were often not reinforced by leaders. Reports
were also not followed up especially in terms of the repercussions for the bully. Kate shared, “I

52
was always told by HR. Well, we can't say anything to her, because then she'll be in trouble. And
I thought, what do you mean? Yeah, she should be.”
The participants generally recommended better reinforcement of the policies and better
training geared towards recognizing bullying incidents and reporting bullying experiences. Elle
stated, “There needs to be some form of training so that people understand what bullying looks
like, right? Like my manager could really have benefited from understanding that I was being
bullied.” The participants’ recommendations included bias training to help leaders recognize
employees by their skills rather than their personal opinions about them which enable bullying.
In this theme, the findings revealed how women leaders made sense of their experience
of bullying through describing how their workplace enabled such behaviors. The participants
perceived that a workplace that was generally toxic enabled bullying. A toxic work environment
entailed a culture that allowed suppression, exclusion, and humiliation to happen. Enabling or
allowing bullying also meant that supervisors and other leaders tended to dismiss bullying
complaints.
Theme 4: Gained Empowerment to Move Past Being Bullied
The participants shared that they also grew empowered to resolve their problems with
workplace bullying. They explained that bullying at the workplace was different from bullying at
school where the victims were typically stuck and powerless. As adults in the workplace, the
participants shared that they had the power to accept that they had no control over their bullies,
but they could control their response, or they could choose to leave the organization all together.
The participants made sense of learning from their experiences and either played along with the
office politics or had the confidence to leave the organization. Kristen stated, “It forced me to
learn some things that I hadn't learned before. And I think I ended up being a better consultant

53
for it.” Megan shared, “I have to show my face, I'm never gonna get promotions, just only based
off of my work…I would even force myself to wear makeup, and I hated doing that.”
The participants recognized that their experiences of workplace bullying were not
healthy. They were empowered in the sense of acknowledging the need to prioritize their health,
energy, and satisfaction which led to their decision to leave the organization. As they felt
empowered, they also recognized themselves to have valuable skills that would help them secure
another job. Catherine detailed how she believed that she was capable of securing another job in
which she could be excited and passionate instead of staying at a workplace where she was
bullied.
Some participants learned to stand up for themselves. Emily and Jennifer felt empowered
to stand up against their workplace bully to protect their team from experiencing the attacks they
experienced. Emily elaborated, “And for my personal growth, especially as a leader, if I'm
standing up for my team, as well, I need to make sure that I'm able to stand up for and make sure
their voice is heard.”
The participants also felt empowered when they engaged in self-care. Self-care included
addressing their mental health needs such as focusing on the pet they adopted or their passion
projects rather than keep thinking about their workplace bully. Additionally, self-care also
involved attending therapy and coaching. The participants shared that therapy and coaching
sessions were effective but were from their personal expenses. Kenzie stated, “I do have
leadership coaching. Now, once a week. I use a platform which I really like. And then I also have
just like regular therapy once a week, which is helpful… but I had to pay for them.” Nonetheless,
the impacts of therapy and coaching included building resilience, confidence, and improved
mental health.

54
In making sense of their experiences, the participants shared that they have gained growth
and resilience as a result of being bullied at the workplace. As they grew stronger, they felt
empowered to stop being victimized by workplace bullies. They have realized that they were
adults and that they have a choice to leave the organization or to play along with office politics to
reach their career goals. They also engaged more in self-care and in caring for their team.
Theme 5: Sought Emotional and Legal Support Against Workplace Bullying
The participants’ way of addressing their experiences of workplace bullying included
seeking support from others. They were professional in their approach of addressing the issue
through reporting the incident to the HR department and seeking legal counsel when the incident
resulted in being laid off. Abigail and Kenzie shared their experiences of filing a complaint
against their workplace bully to the HR department. Abigail stated that she reported her
experience to the HR department and brought evidence to support her claims. Abigail shared,
“So everything was all documented through email, like the couple of conversations… And so it
was very easy to just take that information to HR.” Kenzie did not have a favorable experience
when she worked in a private organization, but in a publicly traded company, HR had a process
on addressing workplace bullying. Kenzie, along with Jessa, Kristen, and Matilda described how
reporting bulling experiences to the HR involved a third-party ethics service. Kristen stated,
“They have ethics hotlines, you could call in and complain anonymously.” Jessa shared her
experience in using the ethics hotline service: “And I have used that to report a super unethical
manager much later…They got to the bottom of it and fired the person. So, it works, for sure.”
Catherine perceived that their HR department was doing an acceptable job of addressing
workplace bullying, as the older men she worked with were known to be misogynistic, but they
“reined it in for fear of getting in trouble.”

55
Abigail, Catherine, and Elle experienced workplace bullying that resulted to them being
laid off. They felt that their termination was not fair. They sought the support of a legal counsel
to address their problem. Elle shared, “They didn't want to pay it. And I got an attorney. And I
ultimately got an attorney for the Tech Company1 thing as well. And I got a settlement from
them.”
Apart from professional and legal support, the participants also sought emotional support.
The participants had the support of their team including some direct supervisors and
subordinates, as well as the support of their friends and family. Megan declared that she had a
supportive direct supervisor who stood by her when she reported the bullying experience to the
HR department. Catherine and Jennifer recalled that their team understood what they were
experiencing and helped them feel empowered to speak against their workplace bully. Catherine
stated, “Having a team under me that I knew had my back made me feel more empowered to be
like, I don't think you should say that.” Abigail was the only participant who depicted that she
talked to her friends and family outside of the workplace as a way to seek emotional support in
addressing her experience of workplace bullying. She indicated that her personal support system
served as a “sounding board” of different opinions that gave her ideas on how to confront her
problems with the workplace bully.
When the participants gained the empowerment to stand up for themselves, they were
mindful of seeking justice while maintaining their professionalism. They went through the
proper channels to address the bullying which included reporting the incident to the HR
department and seeking legal counsel. The participants also sought emotional support from their
family and friends.

56
Summary of Findings
The purpose of this study was to understand the workplace bullying experiences of
women in leadership in publicly traded companies in the United States. Twelve women in
leadership in publicly traded companies in the United States were selected and interviewed for
this study. The participants’ experiences were differentiated into bullying by male colleagues and
superiors and bullying by female colleagues and superiors. Male colleagues’ and superiors’
bullying was attributed to gender-based discrimination including undermining women in
leadership due to being unable to accept that a woman was their equal or higher up. Female
colleagues’ and superiors’ bullying was more prominent in male-dominated workspaces in which
women belittle other women to make themselves look good. Both male and female workplace
bullies were perceived as manipulative.
Making sense of workplace bullying experience involved insights about the work
environment, one’s empowerment, and the support available. The work environment where
bullying occurred was typically a toxic one which enabled suppression, exclusion, and
humiliation. However, with self-care and support from HR, the legal counsel, and their friends
and family, they grew empowered to stand up for themselves and their team. The participants
reported recognizing that workplace bullying behaviors were not acceptable and that they
reported the bullies or they chose to confidently leave the organization. The next section will
start with a brief summary of study findings. Subsequently, the next section will contain
recommendations based on these findings. The conclusions of the study are also presented in the
next section.
Discussion for Research Question One
Research Question One revealed two themes regarding lived experiences of gender-based
workplace bullying. These themes included experiences of being bullied by male colleagues, as

57
well as being targeted by female colleagues. The following section will discuss these themes and
how they relate to existing research.
Theme 1: Experiences of Men Using Their Perceived Authority Over Women at the Workplace
The research found that 75% of the participants felt singled out and victimized through
bullying by their male colleagues and superiors, due to their gender as women. The remainder of
the participants noted that their colleagues and superiors who partook in bullying also did so
towards other colleagues. Lewis and Gunn (2007) noted in their study that 83% of bullies
occupied leadership positions, while related studies that focused on workplace bullying found a
correlation between gender and perceived power and status (Roscigno et al., 2009; Salin, 2003;
Salin & Hoel, 2013). The participants shared various experiences regarding workplace bullying
by male colleagues, most of which related to social manipulation, as detailed by the studies of
Caponecchia et al. (2012), and Salin and Hoel (2013).
These experiences included the participants being gaslit by their male colleagues to the
extent that the bullies would alter facts, including the women's narratives, to gain more favor
from fellow male co-workers and superiors. This form of manipulation escalated further, to the
point where at least two of the participants got laid off after speaking out against their bullies,
with no support offered from co-workers. These findings support those of Patterson et al. (2018),
that upward bullying toward women in leadership positions over extended periods led to a
perceived loss of legitimate power and authority over their subordinates. As shown in this study,
the loss of legitimate power and authority was preceded by a loss of respect from co-workers due
to gender-based bullying. This phenomenon was also articulated in other studies that found a
correlation between gender and the likelihood of becoming targets of workplace bullying,

58
attributing this trend to societal perceptions of women holding lower power and status than men
(Roscigno et al., 2009; Salin, 2003; Salin & Hoel, 2013).
These findings linked to further experiences of social manipulation where participants
shared occurrences of male co-workers banding together. Male superiors were perceived as
taking the side of male subordinates over those of their female counterparts. While workplace
bullies tended to treat their colleagues and superiors as equals, they typically did not recognize
women leaders' rank. Various researchers (Fox & Stallworth, 2015; McCord et al., 2018; Omi &
Winant, 2015; Winter, 2015) highlighted unequal power dynamics in workplace bullying that
resulted in gender-based disparities toward leader-to-follower relations. One participant
expressed how a male workplace bully in an equal position did not consider women to be of the
same status at the organization. It could be hypothesized that the perceived negative
organizational cultures resulted from women being in non-prototypical leadership positions
within predominantly male homogeneous workplaces (Glambek et al., 2020).
Furthermore, the participants shared workplace bullying through experiences of being
objectified, sexualized, and harassed by male colleagues. Although these aspects were perceived
by the participants as being related to bullying in the workplace, none of the definitions
regarding workplace bullying included aspects of a sexual nature. The difference between
sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender, were not covered in this study. Bullying through
sexualization and objectification, then could be better described as sexual harassment rather than
bullying and falls outside the scope of this research study.
Theme 2: Experiences of Women Attacking Women at the Workplace
The second theme that was extrapolated from the findings, saw some similarities with the
first theme. Not only did the participants experience gender-based bullying from male co-

59
workers, but also from their female colleagues. Workplace bullying through social manipulation
from female colleagues also included aspects of gaslighting and the manipulation of facts in
attempts at gaining favor. The participants were further bullied by their female colleagues
through targeted microaggression, whereby fellow female co-workers excessively criticized and
critiqued the work of the participants. Previous research into workplace bullying showed how
acts of microaggression manifested through acts such as assigning unreasonable workloads,
withholding information and resources, giving unreasonable deadlines, undermining, sabotaging
work, publicly criticizing, gossiping, work exclusion, and excessively monitoring work
(Caponecchia et al., 2012; Salin & Hoel, 2013). These experiences were shared by at least two
participants, who described the outcomes of such behavior as feeling belittled and excluded from
the workplace. When women were excluded from work and could not do the work assigned
because of workplace bullying, their work performance was negatively impacted (Glambek et
al., 2014). The majority of the participants perceived these actions as being challenged for
power, authority, and promotion.
According to Baillien et al. (2011), organizational cultures with low people orientation
and high-performance orientation had higher prevalences of workplace bullying. The addition of
organizational values such as competitiveness and individualism (Hutchinson, 2012) could
explain the perceived power challenges from fellow female colleagues against the participants.
These organizational cultures and values were elaborated on by at least one-third of the
participants, who shared experiences of confrontations and being undermined during meetings.
Competitiveness for favor and promotions was not only perceived by the participants' peers but
also by superiors and supervisors. Participants shared experiences of being seen over for
promotion or being unfairly reprimanded when laying complaints against co-worker bullies due

60
to narratives being changed in favor of the bullies. These findings of female-to-female bullying
were also found in research by Vartia and Hyyti (2002), and Parchment and Andrew (2019),
postulating that such bullying extended beyond the boundaries of hierarchical positions and
involved supervisors, peers, and subordinates.
These findings, when engaged through a gendered lens, showed a lack of support
between female peers in the workplace. Bullying tactics employed by colleagues and superiors
highlighted the absence of gender solidarity. Potential reasons for the lack of support included
fear of retaliation and reprimand, the absence of support from bystanders, and a lack of
awareness of workplace bullying (Jönsson & Muhonen, 2022). It could be hypothesized that the
perceived bullying toward the participants was not purely gender related but also based on
competitive power struggles within organizational cultures.
Summary of Research Question One
The participants’ experiences of workplace bullying aligned with concepts discussed in
related literature which included abusive supervision, emotional and psychological abuse, and
workplace harassment (Ballard & Easteal, 2018; D’Cruz et al., 2014; Einarsen, 2000;
Hutchinson, 2012; Nielsen et al., 2017; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018; Salin & Hoel, 2013). The
specific bullying experiences of the participants included being singled out, being discriminated
potentially because of their gender, being belittled, and being manipulated. Without being
probed, the participants generally segregated their narratives of workplace bullying experiences
into bullying by male colleagues and superiors and by female colleagues and superiors.
According to research participants, male workplace bullies tended to be insecure that a woman
was their equal or more superior than them. Male colleagues and superiors tended to believe that
women leaders at the workplace were not their equals regardless of their qualifications and ranks

61
and that their authority was often undermined. Female workplace bullies tended to exist more in
male-dominated spaces where they felt threatened by other women; thus, they feel the need to
challenge and be critical of women leaders. The similarity between male and female workplace
bullies, however, was to manipulate others into thinking that they were more favorable than the
women leader they were bullying.
Discussion for Research Question Two
The second research question focused on the process of sensemaking, and how women
leaders engaged with this process toward workplace bullying. The findings were categorized into
three themes, namely workplace enabled bullying, the gaining of empowerment to move past
being bullied, and lastly the seeking out of emotional end legal support against workplace
bullying. The following section will discuss the findings of the study according to these themes.
Theme 3: Workplace Enabling Bullying
All of the participants in this study shared that suppression, exclusion, and humiliation
formed part of their experiences of toxic organizational cultures that directly enabled workplace
bullying. Findings of this study suggest that participants' experiences of suppression resulted
from workplace bullies being protected by allied managers and biased HR departments. The
research found that workplace friendship and organizational justice reduced workplace bullying
(Hsu et al., 2019). The opposite was deduced from the current study, where a lack of workplace
friendship led to organizational injustice, as participants shared injustices where the perpetrators
were protected through their peer networks. The current study again showed the opposite to be
true concerning research done by Choi and Park (2019). Where said researchers found
membership of the in-group to be considered a protective measure, the current study's findings
showed that being excluded from the in-group, as perceived by the participants, led to

62
suppression, exclusion, and being unprotected. These contradictions were supported by
statements from the participants regarding perceived cover-ups and investigations without
outcomes.
Participant perceptions of injustice within toxic organizational environments led half the
participants to not engage in seeking justice through keeping quiet when being victimized by
workplace bullies. Research found women to be less likely to confront perpetrators of workplace
bullying because of existing power imbalances (Rae & Neall, 2022). Fears of speaking out
against workplace bullies were found to be the result of anxieties related to being perceived as
antagonistic, troublemakers, non-team players, and possible dismissal. Research into such
avoidance mechanisms found them ineffective in remedying the circumstances, forcing victims
to change their behavior to avoid possible confrontations (O'Donnell et al., 2012; Rosander et al.,
2020). At least two participants acknowledged that remaining quiet was a direct response to fears
of dismissal. These fears were highlighted by a study that revealed how failed responses to
workplace bullying resulted in 62% of bullied employees leaving the organization, either
voluntarily or involuntarily (Namie, 2021). A further aspect that a participant brought up was
related to the participant's insecurities. This acknowledgment added a factor to the study that was
unrelated to organizational cultures. Factors that pertained to personality and self-worth, possibly
due to factors unrelated to their current circumstances or positions, also influenced participants'
reactions to workplace bullying.
Further workplace-enabled bullying was also experienced by participants through a lack
of accountability measures and insufficient policies against workplace bullying. Participants
shared instances where reports of bullying were dismissed due to a perceived ideology that male
colleagues were more valued by organizations, with policies not being adhered to. A study by

63
Djurkovic et al. (2021) found that HR professionals had policies in place to prevent workplace
bullying but focused more on the implementation thereof toward safeguarding the organization's
interests instead of supporting victims of bullying. From participant feedback combined with this
study's literature review, the research found multifaceted discrepancies concerning HR
professionals and workplace bullying. The research showed that HR lacked comprehension
regarding the nature of workplace bullying, which included factors that led to perceived
vulnerability, the ineffective implementation of policies, and the inability of victims to confront
their bullies (Rae & Neall, 2022; Sheehan et al., 2020).
The participants also stated that their experiences of existing bullying policies in the
workplace were insufficient, and related more to harassment than it did to bullying, which
enabled further bullying, since said policies did not hold perpetrators accountable for their
actions (Hodgins et al., 2020). The work of Baillien et al. (2011) suggested that a lower
prevalence of workplace bullying existed in organizations with people-oriented cultures and
strong anti-bullying policies. However, in this study it was found that although policies against
bullying existed within the corporate workplace, leaders and supervisors lacked the willingness
to enforce said policies. Various studies have shed light on proactive actions that could be taken
to address workplace bullying, however, they also highlighted a vagueness toward the roles of
HR professionals, and which parties to involve during procedural actions (Djurkovic et al., 2021;
Salin et al., 2020). Participants further shared the need for the reinforcement of workplace
bullying policies, in conjunction with training towards greater understanding and utilization of
said policies within corporate settings. In gaining a better understanding of employee well-being,
corporate environmental factors such as workplace culture, organizational support, policies and

64
justice mechanisms, work stressors, and individual leadership styles needed to be addressed and
implemented (D'Cruz et al., 2014; Hayat & Afshari, 2020; Salin & Hoel, 2013).
Theme 4: Gained Empowerment to Move Past Being Bullied
The findings of this study highlighted the resolve of participants to deal with workplace
bullying on their own terms. The participants shared experiences of sensemaking toward their
circumstances through acceptance of their lack of control over bullies. Sensemaking empowered
them through controlling their response toward workplace bullying, and improved the negative
health impact that the experiences and effects of workplace bullying had on them. Research has
shown that workplace bullying has a negative impact on the physical health of victims, including
developing Type 2 diabetes, respiratory diseases, and cardiovascular diseases, including
coronary heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases (Tsuno et al., 2022; Xu et al., 2018, 2019).
Tsuno et al. (2022) and O'Donnell et al. (2012) further connected exposure to workplace bullying
with taking more than usual sick days, which adversely led to perceptions of poorer work
performance and self-reported feelings of guilt and shame instead of healing and sensemaking.
In utilizing processes of sensemaking, the participants felt psychologically empowered
through engaging in practices of self-care. These practices included outwardly projected aspects
such as involvement in passion projects outside of the workplace. In a study by Hollis (2023),
potential effective interventions against the effects of workplace bullying were also found in
inwardly projected aspects of self-care, which included actions such as mindfulness therapy, eye
movement desensitization and reprocessing for post-traumatic stress disorder, and journaling.
Implications highlighted by Hampton et al. (2019) include the potential to develop psychological
empowerment in women leaders to decrease experiences of workplace bullying and improve
their resiliency in the face of workplace stressors. Previous findings align with the findings of the

65
current study, where participants engaged in self-care acts through attending therapy and
leadership coaching in order to gain improved resilience, confidence, and mental health. It was
noted during the current study that these acts of seeking aid for self-care and improved mental
health came from a personal desire from the participants themselves, without emotional or
monetary support from their employers. This lack of support led some of the participants to
utilize their empowerment to stand up against their workplace bullies to not only stand up for
themselves but also in protection of their team members.
It was further revealed during the current study that the participants made sense of
learning from their experiences and either played along with the office politics or had the
confidence to leave the organization. The participants were empowered to acknowledge the need
to prioritize their health, energy, and satisfaction. As they felt empowered, they also recognized
themselves as having valuable skills that would help them secure another job, which led to their
decision to leave the organization on their own accord. Therefore, indicating that changing jobs
due to perceptions of injustice significantly reduced exposure to workplace bullying, and
increased the possibility of productiveness, career progression, job satisfaction, and job stability
(Iyer et al., 2023a; Reknes et al., 2020; Rosander et al., 2022).
Theme 5: Sought Emotional and Legal Support Against Workplace Bullying
The current study found that 50% of the participants had positive experiences during their
interactions with HR professionals in requesting support against workplace bullying. Participants
approached their HR departments within publicly traded companies with all the necessary
supporting documents and established HR-related processes already in place for addressing the
reported instances of bullying. Some of the participants shared experiences that involved thirdparty ethics services that dealt with their bullying claims, which included the ability to bring

66
complaints while remaining anonymous. It was found that these reports linked to insights from
HR professionals that investigations, prompt action, disciplinary action, and reconciliation and
mediation stopped workplace bullying (Salin et al., 2020). It can then be hypothesized that
ethical HR professionals, along with adequate policies and regulations to address workplace
bullying, could reduce negative perceptions of bullying towards women leaders in publicly
traded companies.
However, the study also highlighted the opposite of the above-mentioned, where
participants shared experiences of unfair dismissal after reporting incidents of workplace
bullying. This led some of the participants to seek legal support in achieving justice through
professional means. These findings are of concern as they highlight a notable bias among HR
professionals regarding their understanding and clarity of their roles in preventing and managing
workplace bullying. According to research found in the literature review of the current study,
such negative outcomes could also be attributed to inaction from bystanders due to dysfunctional
organizational culture and management deficiencies, as well as fear of repercussions for
bystanders supporting the target (Jönsson & Muhonen, 2022; Thompson et al., 2022). Such
experiences of unfairness and equality could have been reduced through awareness training, the
implementation of anti-bullying policies and codes of conduct, the provision of good and
constructive leadership, promoting workplace cultures of dignity and respect, and
communicating an ethical climate with reporting mistreatment (Salin et al., 2020).
Further findings of the current study were congruent with studies by Katz (2018) and
Thompson et al. (2020) that focused on the support and intervention provided by bystanders who
witnessed workplace bullying through emotional, evaluative, informative, and instrumental
support. The majority of participants reportedly gained access to such emotional support systems

67
within their corporate environments through a variety of bystanders within the workplace. These
bystanders included subordinate team members as well as direct supervisors who offered support
when the participants reported their bullying experiences to the HR department, leading to the
perception that organizational culture was experienced supportive through bystander roles, which
could make a difference toward perceived workplace bullying and the various effects thereof on
women leaders. The supportive role that bystanders played, was attributed to bystanders' ability
to identify workplace bullying through related experiences, and knowledge of bullying obtained
from organizational policies. Participant narratives regarding experiences with HR departments
and supportive bystanders supported this role. These findings were found to agree with Lassiter
et al. (2021) and Jönsson and Muhonen (2022), who suggested the inhibition of workspace
bullying could occur through employee training on the types of workplace bullying, in
conjuncture with company policies, with the addition of examples. One participant shared that
her emotional support system was based outside of the corporate workplace, with friends and
family that served as a sounding board on how to respond to bullying. This approach could also
be perceived as detrimental since friends and family are not immersed in the organizational
culture.
It became evident workplace bullying targeted toward women leaders in publicly traded
companies in the United States is still an area to explore, as the majority of participants shared
experiences of bullying with a lack of fair policy implementation. From this grounded study, it
became clear that there exists a gap within research that focuses on workplace bullying within
the context of the United States. As discussed, there is no singular definition of workplace
bullying but characteristics are identified in the literature. There seems to be a relationship
between negative organizational culture and the perceived effects of workplace bullying on the

68
physical and mental health of victims. Through a process of sensemaking, women in leadership
positions gained empowerment against workplace bullying through support from various sources
such as supportive bystanders, prompt and fair action from HR departments, and legal counsel
when needed.
Summary of Research Question Two
The participants processed their workplace bullying experiences through thinking about
how the work environment was toxic and enabled bullying through suppression, exclusion, and
humiliation. The organization had a lack of accountability measures against workplace bullies.
The policies were inadequate and were not reinforced well by the higher management especially
in startup, less structured companies. However, the participants also reported that they were no
longer students who could do nothing to stand up against their bullies. They learned from their
experiences and were empowered to fight for themselves and their team or to confidently leave
their job and secure a new one. They also knew to care for themselves especially through therapy
and coaching, but the expenses were out of their own pockets. For professional help, they
reached out to the HR department and the legal counsel. In publicly traded companies, the HR
department and reports of workplace bullying were often monitored by a third-party ethics
service reachable through a hotline. For emotional support, one participant reached out to her
friends and family outside of work to talk about options on how to address the problem of
workplace bullying.

69
Recommendations and Conclusions
In this qualitative narrative inquiry, an attempt was made to understand the workplace
bullying experiences of women in leadership positions in publicly traded companies in the
United States. A multitude of previous studies focused on workplace bullying, defined as a form
of interpersonal aggression, whether subtle or flagrant, shown to be persistent over an extended
period (Nielsen et al., 2012). Workplace bullying is distinct from workplace discrimination,
which is prohibited by federal law. Individuals who experienced workplace bullying reported a
variety of manifested physiological and psychological symptoms (McKay, 2014; Nielsen &
Einarsen, 2012; Spagnoli et al., 2017). Despite women occupying 10.6% of CEO positions in the
United States (Schaeffer, 2023), limited research has been done regarding gendered workplace
bullying toward women in leadership positions. The insight obtained from this study could aid in
addressing the psychological abuse, discrediting of work, and the erosion of social support
networks experienced by women (Attell et al., 2017). The research may serve as a foundation to
reduce the phenomenon of socially constructed gender norms in establishing gender equality
within the workplace (Roscigno et al., 2009).
The conceptual framework for this study was based on grounded theory, where data was
systematically collected regarding the perceived experiences of workplace bullying of women
occupying corporate leadership positions. This study examined factors contributing to their
vulnerability, their responses to such adversity, and the broader implications for organizational
dynamics and gender equality within the workplace. The research questions for this study
focused on ascertaining the participants' lived experiences concerning perceived workplace
bullying in publicly traded companies, along with how the participants engaged in sensemaking
in relation to being bullied in the workplace.

70
The study's key findings highlighted women's experiences in corporate leadership roles,
noting that their male co-workers used their perceived authority to maintain a sense of power and
favor over them. This perceived power was shown through gender bases bullying tactics such as
gaslighting, intimidation, and objectification of women, to name a few. However, the research
also showed that fellow female co-workers engaged in tactics of using perceived authority.
Although there were similarities and differences in the tactics employed, the favor-seeking
objectives were mostly the same as those of their male colleagues. The research further
suggested that a workplace culture that was generally toxic in nature directly enabled bullying
with a lack of accountability and repercussions. This perception led female victims to remain
quiet and acquire coping strategies to aid in sensemaking. By prioritizing their health and mental
well-being, participants gained control of their situations, empowering them to address
victimization. The study illuminated that the participants experienced personal well-being by
seeking justice while maintaining professionalism with the help of legal and emotional support
structures.
Recommendations for Stakeholders
The remainder of this section will consist of a discussion of the findings and the
limitations of the study. Recommendations for stakeholder groups will be discussed.
Additionally, recommendations for future research and consideration of the study's implications
will be presented.
Recommendations for Organizational Leadership and Management
Every organizational change requires one or more change agents regarding workplace
bullying. Through an effective intervention based on para-organizational sensitivity, with the
participation of all members of the organization to address the issue from an applicative

71
standpoint, the results of this current study indicate a need to facilitate further initiatives on the
various aspects that lead to workplace bullying. Therefore, a recommendation for organizational
leadership include investing in additional antibullying training,
Anti-bullying Training. Anti-bullying training should be provided to organizational
leaders and managers. Given the increased number of women occupying leadership roles within
the United States, organizational leaders should continue to invest in anti-bullying trainings
focusing on various aspects. These aspects should include not only gender, but also social and
organizational perceptions toward power and status, workplace competitiveness, perceived
physical and mental health risks, and the influence thereof on both women leaders and
organizational productivity (Hutchinson, 2012; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2018). Therefore,
organizational leaders should continue to strive to provide the trainings and information needed
to reduce workplace bullying. Relatedly, in addition to formal trainings, it is recommended that
organizational leaders place resources in common spaces that include what bullying may look
like, as bystanders also play a role in workplace bullying.
Fostering Workplace Inclusion. Another recommendation aimed at organizational
leadership and management is to foster a more inclusive workplace. First, more should be done
to provide resources that may contribute to establishing and maintaining a positive workplace
culture. This should be done for both in-person and remote employees. Establishing peopleoriented organizational cultures along with actionable anti-bullying policies could lead to a
significant reduction in workplace bullying (Baillien et al., 2011). Resources including group
activities, common spaces with activities for breaks or downtime, or opportunities to facilitate
more open dialogue are suggested. Further, management and organizational leaders are
encouraged to ask for routine feedback about workplace culture, inclusion, and how employees

72
feel about efforts to reduce bullying. The results of this feedback may be useful in targeting
future interventions for workplace bullying and improving inclusion and employee morale.
Additionally, a reduction in workplace bullying creates an increase in productivity with less
power struggles and reduced occurrences of sick leave (O'Donnell et al., 2012), as workers
would experience reduced work-related health problems. The experiences shared by the
participants highlight the need for sustainable gender equality and improved organizational
dynamics within the workplace.
Increased Funding for Anti-bullying Initiatives. Finally, a recommendation for
increased funding to learn more about workplace bullying is suggested. Both publicly traded
companies as well as privately owned companies could benefit from this research in gaining a
better understanding of the factors that lead to workplace bullying, and how to address it.
Additionally, future research may yield novel results and reduce the incidence of workplace
bullying.
Recommendations for HR Personnel
Organizational leaders are not the only group for which the results of this study garner
recommendations. Other recommendations are directed at HR departments. This section will
discuss the recommendations for HR personnel.
More Stringent Safeguards. The first recommendation for HR personnel is to develop
and implement policies and procedures to limit workplace bullying, alongside safeguards to
ensure that implemented policies are adhered to, ensuring fairness and equality (Baillien et al.,
2011). HR-related training on justice, fairness, and amity could significantly impact the
organization, its employees, and the perceived organizational culture (Hsu et al., 2019).
Relatedly, HR personnel should strive to align themselves as advocates for employees, rather

73
than the company. In many instances, HR personnel will protect the company against employee
complaints and ignore any signs of bullying that may be witnessed in order to safeguard the
interests of the company. That needs to end. Instead, HR personnel should be open and willing to
speak to employees about their experiences. Similarly, HR personnel should partner or
participate with psychologists or other mental health resources that can be made available for
those experiencing bullying. Learning from mental health professionals on how to better interact
with those who have experienced bullying. Having additional access to resources may also be
beneficial to helping to address victims’ needs.
Advocate for Bullying Victims. Additionally, another recommendation is to help
advocate for the victims of bullying. Previous research suggests that trainings alone may not be
enough to reduce bullying, and the negative outcomes for both the individual and the company.
For example, O’Donnell et al. (2012) found that women who were being bullied often took sick
days, in order to aid their mental health and reduce the effects of workplace bullying. As taking
sick days does little to reduce workplace bullying, both the individual and the organization
suffer, until, ultimately, the individual leaves the job. Therefore, it is recommended that HR
departments also offer individual resources to those that have been bullied to help increase
resilience and coping, and to provide avenues for healing outside of asking victims to tough it
out and sending employees to trainings.
Learning More About Bullying. Relatedly, it is recommended that HR personnel be
trained to better understand how bullying influences the individual, and to separate the impact on
the organization more clearly. For example, HR personnel should be tasked to connect more with
employees, to ensure open communication is promoted, and signal that the HR department is to
help employees navigate work-related challenges, and not as an agent of the organization that

74
may be facilitating the bullying to begin with. Doing so may create additional avenues of coping
within the workplace and mitigate the harmful outcomes associated with bullying.
Recommendations for Future Research
The research is informative in addressing the existing gap regarding workplace bullying
experiences of women in leadership positions in publicly traded companies in the United States.
Future research endeavors could include studies into profession-based factors and the influence
of workplace bullying in relation to employees' job intentions, productiveness, and career
stability. More focus should be brought to the relationship between toxic cultures and workplace
bullying to determine if toxic workplace cultures facilitate bullying or vice versa. A study by
Choi and Park (2019) found the value that a sense of in-group membership as a protective factor
had against toxic workplace environments and workplace bullying. However, the findings of the
current study led to a belief that the concept of an in-group also entailed the existence of an outgroup, as was seen by participants through their experienced gender-based bullying. Further
research into ascertaining the harmful aspects of in-groups within the workplace could aid those
who found themselves in the out-groups.
From the research in the literature review, findings from research outside of the United
States showed that workplace bullying was experienced by women employed in various
positions, across a variety of companies. Additional research based on the current study could
incorporate both women in leadership positions as well as women in subordinate roles, within
publicly traded and privately owned companies in the United States. This larger scope could lead
to a larger sampling of participants. Relatedly, future researchers could explore and compare
workplace bullying for both men and women in the context of the United States and other
countries to better understand similarities and differences in the victims’ experiences.

75
Finally, further research is needed to better understand workplace bullying as a function
of age. Most participants in this study were between the ages of 30 and 45. However, 2
participants were in their mid-50s and early 60s, respectively. The two older participants
indicated bullying was no different in terms of frequency or severity relative to what they
experienced decades ago. Therefore, age may influence both the severity and commonality of
workplace bullying and requires further study.
Conclusion
This study sought to understand the workplace bullying experiences of women in
leadership roles in publicly traded companies in the United States. Data pertaining to interviews
from twelve participants who self-identify as women currently employed in positions of manager
of above, yielded accounts of workplace bullying and aspects of empowerment through
processes of sensemaking toward their perceived circumstances. This research has highlighted
the struggles, resilience, and adaptability of women in leadership positions in publicly traded
companies in the United States. For too long, toxic organizational cultures enabled workplace
bullying to the extent that victims were treated unjustly, leading to adverse health implications,
and unfair dismissals. Through sensemaking, support from organizational bystanders, and
focusing on their health and well-being, women leaders achieved empowerment. Empowerment
led women leaders to stand up to workplace bullying, for themselves as well as for other victims
of workplace bullying, and to procure equality and justice without losing their sense of
professionalism or sacrificing job satisfaction. Findings of this current study have far reaching
implications for both organizational leadership and HR personnel who are tasked with creating
workplace cultures that are safe for all individuals. Specifically, realizing that macro-level
solutions and organizational trainings may not be the most effective way to reduce or combat

76
workplace bullying. Although training is helpful, more emphasis should be put on organizational
leaders and HR personnel to help the individual, both in building resilience and fostering a
relationship where employees feel safe reporting and discussing these issues. Additionally, all
stakeholders should work on increasing inclusion within the workplace, to foster employee
wellbeing and improve morale. Moreover, recommendations include that HR personnel more
strongly advocate for the victim instead of aligning with organizational leadership to protect the
interest of the company which continues to be a disturbing trend in workplaces in the United
States. By working together, organizational leaders, management, and HR personnel can increase
inclusion and decrease the detrimental impact of workplace bullying on employees, and begin to
foster policies and workplace ethics to ensure gender equality and safe organizational cultures
for all employees.

77
References
Aarestad, S., Einarsen, S., Hjemdal, O., Gjengedal, R., Osnes, K., Sandin, K., Hannisdal, M.,
Bjørndal, M., & Harris, A. (2020). Clinical characteristics of patients seeking treatment
for common mental disorders presenting with workplace bullying experiences. Frontiers
in Psychology, 11, 583324. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.583324
Aarestad, S., Harris, A., Hjemdal, O., Gjengedal, R., Osnes, K., Sandin, K., Reme, S., Hannisdal,
M., & Einarsen, S. (2022). Healing the wounds of workplace bullying: Evaluating mental
health and workplace participation among victims seeking treatment for common mental
disorders. Work (Reading, Mass.), 73(4), 1379–1391. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR210920
Ågotnes, K., Nielsen, M., Skogstad, A., Gjerstad, J., & Einarsen, S. (2023). The role of
leadership practices in the relationship between role stressors and exposure to bullying
behaviours - a longitudinal moderated mediation design. Work and Stress, ahead-ofprint(ahead-of-print), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2023.2226635
Alessi, E., & Kahn, S. (2023). Toward a trauma-informed qualitative research approach:
Guidelines for ensuring the safety and promoting the resilience of research
participants. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 20(1), 121–154.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2022.2107967
Attell, B., Kummerow-Brown, K., & Treiber, L. (2017). Workplace bullying, perceived job
stressors, and psychological distress: Gender and race differences in the stress
process. Social Science Research, 65, 210–221.

78
Baillien, E., Escartín, J., Gross, C., & Zapf, D. (2017). Towards a conceptual and empirical
differentiation between workplace bullying and interpersonal conflict. European Journal
of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(6), 870–881.
Baillien, E., Neyens, I., & De Witte, H. (2011). Organizational correlates of workplace bullying
in small- and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 29(6),
610–625.
Ballard, A. & Easteal, P. (2018). The secret silent spaces of workplace violence: Focus on
bullying (and harassment). Laws, 7(4).
Buriro, T., Anand, V., Qureshi, M., & Shah, S. (2022). The role of perceived organizational
support: evidences from the horizontal and vertical workplace bullying. Employee
Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 1-14.
Burr, H., Balducci, C., Conway, P., & Rose, U. (2022). Workplace bullying and long-term
sickness absence—A five-year follow-up study of 2476 employees aged 31 to 60 years in
Germany. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12),
7193–. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127193
Campuzano, M. (2019). Force and inertia: A systematic review of women’s leadership in maledominated organizational cultures in the United States. Human Resource Development
Review, 18(4), 437–469.
Caponecchia, C., Sun, A., & Wyatt, A. (2012). “Psychopaths” at work? Implications of lay
persons’ use of labels and behavioural criteria for psychopathy. Journal of Business
Ethics, 107(4), 399–408.
Choi, J., & Park, M. (2019). Effects of nursing organisational culture on face‐to‐face bullying
and cyberbullying in the workplace. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 28(13-14), 2577-2588.

79
Ciby, M., & Sahai, S. (2023). When and why workplace cyberbullying influences intention to
stay: role of workplace social capital and affective commitment. International Journal of
Manpower. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-04-2022-0183
Creswell, J. & Creswell, J. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Davidson, M., & Cooper, C. (1992). Shattering the glass ceiling: the woman manager. P.
Chapman.
Day, N., Meglich, P., & Porter, T. (2022). Measuring bullying in sexual minorities: testing two
bullying scales in an LGB sample. Journal of Homosexuality, 69(7), 1160–1184.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2021.1909393
D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2014). Workplace bullying in the context of organisational change:
the significance of pluralism. Industrial Relations Journal, 45(1), 2–21.
D’Cruz, P., Noronha, E., & Beale, D. (2014). The workplace bullying-organizational change
interface: emerging challenges for human resource management. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(10), 1434–1459.
Dempsey, L., Dowling, M., Larkin, P., & Murphy, K. (2016). Sensitive interviewing in
qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 39(6), 480–490.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21743
DiAngelo, R. (2011). White fragility. The International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3(3).
Djurkovic, N., McCormack, D., Hoel, H., & Salin, D. (2021). The role of human resource
professionals (HRPs) in managing workplace bullying: perspectives from HRPs and
employee representatives in Australia. Personnel Review, 50(7/8), 1599–1612.
https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2020-0502

80
Einarsen, S. (2000). Harassment and bullying at work: A review of the Scandinavian
approach. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4), 379–401.
Einarsen, K., Nielsen, M., Hetland, J., Olsen, O., Zahlquist, L., Mikkelsen, E., Koløen, J., &
Einarsen, S. (2020). Outcomes of a proximal workplace intervention against workplace
bullying and harassment: A protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial among
Norwegian industrial workers. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2013–2013.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02013
Einarsen, K., Salin, D., Einarsen, S., Skogstad, A., & Mykletun, R. (2019). Antecedents of
ethical infrastructures against workplace bullying: The role of organizational size,
perceived financial resources and level of high-quality HRM practices. Personnel
Review.
Fattori, A., Neri, L., Aguglia, E., Bellomo, A., Bisogno, A., Camerino, D., Carpiniello, B.,
Cassin, A., Costa, G., De Fazio, P., Di Sciascio, G., Favaretto, G., Fraticelli, C.,
Giannelli, R., Leone, S., Maniscalco, T., Marchesi, C., Mauri, M., Mencacci, C., …
Viora, U. (2015). Estimating the impact of workplace bullying: Humanistic and economic
burden among workers with chronic medical conditions. BioMed Research
International, 2015, 708908–708912.
Feldblum, C., & Lipnic, V. (2016, June). Select task force on the study of harassment in the
workplace report. Retrieved from
https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/task_force_harassment/report.cfm.
Flovik, L., Knardahl, S., & Christensen, J. (2019). Organizational change and employee mental
health: A prospective multilevel study of the associations between organizational changes

81
and clinically relevant mental distress. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment &
Health, 45(2), 134–145.
Fox, S., & Stallworth, L. (2005). Racial/ethnic bullying: Exploring links between bullying and
racism in the U.S. workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(3), 438–456.
Glambek, M., Einarsen, S. V., & Notelaers, G. (2020). Workplace bullying as predicted by nonprototypicality, group identification and norms: A self-categorisation perspective. Work
& Stress, 1–21. doi:10.1080/02678373.2020.1719554
Glambek, M., Hetland, J., & Einarsen, S. (2014). Workplace bullying as an antecedent to job
insecurity and intention to leave: a 6-month prospective study. Human Resource
Management Journal, 24(3), 255–268.
Glaser, B. G. (2002). Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded
theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 23–38.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100203
Glennie, M., O’Donnell, M., Benson, J., & Brown, M. (2019). Work as a government “scientist”:
Professional status security during organisational change and downsizing. Journal of
Sociology (Melbourne, Vic.), 55(2), 252–269.
Gottenborg, E., Yu, A., McBeth, L., & Jaros, K., Burden, M. (2021) The experience of women in
hospital medicine leadership: A qualitative study. Journal of General Internal Medicine,
36, 2678–2682.
Hamburger, M., Basile, K., & Vivolo, A. (2011). Measuring Bullying Victimization,
Perpetration, and Bystander Experiences: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Center
for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullycompendium-a.pdf

82
Hampton, D., & Rayens, M. (2019). Impact of psychological empowerment on workplace
bullying and intent to leave. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(4), 179-
185. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000735
Hamre, K., Fauske, M., Reknes, I., Nielsen, M., Gjerstad, J., & Einarsen, S. (2022). Preventing
and neutralizing the escalation of workplace bullying: The role of conflict management
climate. International Journal of Bullying Prevention, 4(4), 255–265.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-021-00100-y
Hayat, A., & Afshari, L. (2021). Supportive organizational climate: a moderated mediation
model of workplace bullying and employee well-being. Personnel Review, 50(7/8), 1685-
1704.
Heiderscheit, E., Schlick, C., Ellis, R., Cheung, E., Irizarry, D., Amortegui, D., Eng, J., Sosa, J.
A., Hoyt, D., Buyske, J., Nasca, T., Bilimoria, K., & Hu, Y. (2022). Experiences of
LGBTQ+ residents in U.S. general surgery training programs. JAMA Surgery, 157(1),
23–32. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2021.5246
Hodgins, M., MacCurtain, S., & Mannix-McNamara, P. (2020). Power and inaction: Why
organizations fail to address workplace bullying. International Journal of Workplace
Health Management, 13(3), 265-290.
Hodgins, M., MacCurtain, S., & Mannix-McNamara, P. (2014). Workplace bullying and
incivility: a systematic review of interventions. International Journal of Workplace
Health Management, 7(1), 54–72
Hoel, H., Lewis, D., Einarsdottir, A., & Notelaers, G. (2022). Openness about sexual orientation
and exposure to workplace bullying. Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 7(1), 9–9. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjwop.164

83
Hollis, L. (2018). Bullied out of position: Black women’s complex intersectionality, workplace
bullying, and resulting career disruption. Journal of Black Sexuality and
Relationships, 4(3), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1353/bsr.2018.0004
Hollis, L. (2022). In the room, but no seat at the table: mixed methods analysis of HBCU women
faculty and workplace bullying. Journal of Education (Boston, Mass.), 2205742211023–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574221102329
Hollis, L. (2023). Spirit murdering and mobbing: Working strategies for underrepresented
minority faculty survivors of academic workplace bullying. Taboo (New York,
N.Y.), 21(4), 6–20.
Holm, K., Jönsson, S., & Muhonen, T. (2023). How are witnessed workplace bullying and
bystander roles related to perceived care quality, work engagement, and turnover
intentions in the healthcare sector? A longitudinal study. International Journal of Nursing
Studies, 138, 104429.
Housman, M., & Minor, D. (2015). Toxic Workers.
Hsu, F., Liu, Y., & Tsaur, S. (2019). The impact of workplace bullying on hotel employees’
well-being: Do organizational justice and friendship matter?. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management.
Hutchinson, J. (2012). Rethinking Workplace Bullying as an Employment Relations
Problem. Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(5), 637–652.
Ikeda, T., Hori, D., Sasaki, H., Komase, Y., Doki, S., Takahashi, T., Oi, Y., Ikeda, Y., Arai, Y.,
Muroi, K., Ishitsuka, M., Matsuura, A., Go, W., Matsuzaki, I., & Sasahara, S. (2022).
Prevalence, characteristics, and psychological outcomes of workplace cyberbullying

84
during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: a cross-sectional online survey. BMC Public
Health, 22(1), 1087–1087. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13481-6
Iyer, M., Way, D., MacDowell, D., Overholser, B., Spector, N., & Jagsi, R. (2023b). Bullying in
academic medicine: Experiences of women physician leaders. Academic Medicine:
Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 98(2), 255–263.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005003
Iyer, M., Way, D., MacDowell, D., Overholser, B., Spector, N., & Jagsi, R. (2023a). Why
gender-based bullying is normalized in academic medicine: Experiences and perspectives
of women physician leaders. Journal of Women's Health (2002), 32(3), 347–355.
https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2022.0290
Jelavić, S., Aleksić, A., & Braje, I. (2021). Behind the curtain: Workplace incivility—Individual
actors in cultural settings. Sustainability, 13, 1249‒1264.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031249
Jönsson, S., & Muhonen, T. (2022). Factors influencing the behavior of bystanders to workplace
bullying in healthcare—A qualitative descriptive interview study. Research in Nursing &
Health, 45(4), 424–432. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22228
Katz, J. (2018). Bystander training as leadership training: Notes on the origins, philosophy, and
pedagogy of the mentors in violence prevention model. Violence Against Women, 24(15),
1755–1776. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801217753322
Lassiter, N., Bostain, N., & Lentz, C. (2021). Best practices for early bystander intervention
training on workplace intimate partner violence and workplace bullying. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 36(11-12), 5813–5837.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518807907

85
Lewis, D., & Gunn, R. (2007). Workplace bullying in the public sector: Understanding the racial
dimension. Public Administration, 85(3), 641–665.
Lockhart, P. & Bhanugopan, R. (2020). The “Too hard basket”: managing workplace
bullying. International Journal of Organizational Analysis (2005), 28(2), 507–522.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-12-2018-1603
Mastio, E., & Dovey, K. (2019). Power dynamics in organizational change: an Australian
case. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 39(9/10), 796–811.
McCord, M., Joseph, D., Dhanani, L., & Beus, J. (2018). A meta-analysis of sex and race
differences in perceived workplace mistreatment. The Journal of Applied
Psychology, 103(2), 137–163.
McKay, R. (2014). Confronting workplace bullying: Agency and structure in the royal Canadian
mounted police. Administration & Society, 46(5), 548–572.
Meglich, P., Porter, T., & Day, N. (2020). Does sexual orientation of bullying target influence
bystander response? The Irish Journal of Management, 39(1), 17–33.
https://doi.org/10.2478/ijm-2010-0005
Merriam, S., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation
(4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Metin Camgoz, S., Tayfur Ekmekci, O., Bayhan Karapinar, P., & Kumbul Guler, B. (2016). Job
insecurity and turnover intentions: Gender differences and the mediating role of work
engagement. Sex Roles, 75(11-12), 583–598.
Namie, G. (2021). 2021 WBI U.S. workplace bullying survey, the complete report.
https://workplacebullying.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/2021-Full-Report.pdf

86
Nielsen, M., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: A metaanalytic review. Work and Stress, 26(4), 309–332.
Nielsen, M., & Einarsen, S. (2018). What we know, what we do not know, and what we should
and could have known about workplace bullying: An overview of the literature and
agenda for future research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 42, 71–83.
Nielsen, M., Bakke, L., Sana, P., & Einarsen, S. (2022). Assessing workplace bullying and its
outcomes: The paradoxical role of perceived power imbalance between target and
perpetrator. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.907204
Nielsen, M., Christensen, J., Finne, L., & Knardahl, S. (2020). Workplace bullying, mental
distress, and sickness absence: The protective role of social support. International
Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 93(1), 43–53.
Nielsen, M., Glasø, L., & Einarsen, S. (2017). Exposure to workplace harassment and the fivefactor model of personality: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual
Differences, 104, 195–206.
Nielsen, M. B., Hetland, J., Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Longitudinal relationships
between workplace bullying and psychological distress. Scandinavian journal of work,
environment & health, 38(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3178
O’Donnell, S., MacIntosh, J., & Wuest, J. (2012). A theoretical understanding of sickness
absence among women who have experienced workplace bullying. SAGE Secondary
Data Analysis, 20(4), v3–315–452.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2015). Racial formation in the United States. Routledge, Chapter 4.

87
Parchment, J., & Andrews, D. (2019). The incidence of workplace bullying and related
environmental factors among nurse managers. The Journal of Nursing Administration,
49(3), 132-137. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000726
Patterson, E., Branch, S., Barker, M., & Ramsay, S. (2018). Playing with power: Examinations
of types of power used by staff members in workplace bullying – a qualitative interview
study. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 13(1), 32-52.
https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-10-2016-1441
Pilch, I., & Turska, E. (2015). Relationships between Machiavellianism, organizational culture,
and workplace bullying: Emotional abuse from the target’s and the perpetrator’s
perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1), 83–93.
Qureshi, H. A., & Ünlü, Z. (2020). Beyond the paradigm conflicts: A four-step coding
instrument for grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19,
160940692092818-. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920928188
Rae, K., & Neall, A. M. (2022). Human resource professionals’ responses to workplace
bullying. Societies (Basel, Switzerland), 12(6), 190–.
https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12060190
Rajalingam, D., Nymoen, I., Nyberg, H., Nielsen, M., Einarsen, S., & Gjerstad, J. (2021).
Workplace bullying increases the risk of anxiety through a stress-induced β2-adrenergic
receptor mechanism: a multisource study employing an animal model, cell culture
experiments and human data. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental
Health, 94(8), 1905–1915. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-021-01718-7
Reknes, I., Glambek, M., & Einarsen, S. (2020). Injustice perceptions, workplace bullying and
intention to leave. Employee Relations, doi:10.1108/er-10-2019-0406

88
Rosander, M., Salin, D., Viita, L., & Blomberg, S. (2020). Gender matters: Workplace bullying,
gender, and mental health. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 560178.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.560178
Rosander, M., Salin, D., & Blomberg, S. (2022). The last resort: Workplace bullying and the
consequences of changing jobs. Scandinavian Journal ofPpsychology, 63(2), 124–135.
https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12794
Roscigno, V., Lopez, S., & Hodson, R. (2009). Supervisory bullying, status inequalities and
organizational context. Social Forces, 87(3), 1561–1589.
Salin, D. (2015). Risk factors of workplace bullying for men and women: The role of the
psychosocial and physical work environment. Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, 56(1), 69–77.
Salin, D. (2003). ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating and
precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56(10),
1213–1232.
Salin, D., Cowan, R., Adewumi, O., Apospori, E., Bochantin, J., D’Cruz, P., Djurkovic, N.,
Durniat, K., Escartín, J., Guo, J., Işik, I., Koeszegi, S., McCormack, D., Monserrat, S. I.,
Olivas-Luján, M., & Zedlacher, E. (2020). Prevention of and interventions in workplace
bullying: A global study of human resource professionals’ reflections on preferred
action. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(20), 2622–2644.
Salin, D., & Hoel, H. (2011), ‘Organizational causes of workplace bullying,’ in bullying and
harassment in the workplace, eds. S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, and C.L. Cooper,
London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 227–244.

89
Salin, D., & Hoel, H. (2013). Workplace bullying as a gendered phenomenon. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 28(3), 235–251.
Salin, D., & Notelaers, G. (2018). The effects of workplace bullying on witnesses: Violation of
the psychological contract as an explanatory mechanism? International Journal of
Human Resource Management.
Salin, D. & Notelaers, G. (2020). The effects of workplace bullying on witnesses: violation of
the psychological contract as an explanatory mechanism? International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 31(18), 2319–2339.
Samsudin, E., Isahak, M., Rampal, S., Rosnah, I., & Zakaria, M. (2020). Organisational
antecedents of workplace victimisation: The role of organisational climate, culture,
leadership, support, and justice in predicting junior doctors' exposure to bullying at work.
The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 35(1), 346-367.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2926
Sarros, J., Cooper, B., & Santora, J. (2008). Building a climate for innovation through
transformational leadership and organizational culture. Journal of Leadership and
Organizational Studies, 15(2), 145-158.
Schaeffer, K. (2023). The data on women leaders fact sheet. Pew Research. Accessed on
November 9, 2023. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/fact-sheet/the-data-onwomen-leaders/
Sheehan, M., McCabe, T., & Garavan, T. (2020). Workplace bullying and employee outcomes: a
moderated mediated model. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 31(11), 1379–1416.

90
Spagnoli, P., Balducci, C., & Fraccaroli, F. (2017). A two-wave study on workplace bullying
after organizational change: A moderated mediation analysis. Safety Science, 100, 13–19.
Srivastava, S., & Agarwal, S. (2020). Workplace bullying and intention to leave: a moderated
mediation model of emotional exhaustion and supervisory support. Employee
Relations, 42(6), 1547–1563. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-07-2019-0293
Sue, D. W. (2005). Racism and the conspiracy of silence: Presidential address. The Counseling
Psychologist, 33(1), 100-114.
Thompson, N., Carter, M., Crampton, P., Burford, B., Illing, J., & Morrow, G. (2020).
Workplace bullying in healthcare: A qualitative analysis of bystander
experiences. Qualitative Report, 25(11), 3993–4028.
Tsuno, Kawakami, N., Tsutsumi, A., Shimazu, A., Inoue, A., Odagiri, Y., & Shimomitsu, T.
(2022). Victimization and witnessing of workplace bullying and physician-diagnosed
physical and mental health and organizational outcomes: A cross-sectional study. PloS
One, 17(10), e0265863–e0265863. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265863
Tuckey, M., Li, Y., Neall, A., Chen, P., Dollard, M., McLinton, S., Rogers, A., & Mattiske, J.
(2022). Workplace bullying as an organizational problem: Spotlight on people
management practices. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 27(6), 544–565.
https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000335
Vartia, & Hyyti, J. (2002). Gender differences in workplace bullying among prison
officers. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11(1), 113–126.
Wang, H., Lu, C., & Siu, O. (2015). Job insecurity and job performance: The moderating role of
organizational justice and the mediating role of work engagement. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 100(4), 1249–1258.

91
Winter, G. (2015). Determining gender: a social construct? Community Practitioner, 88(2).
Xu, T., Magnusson Hanson, L., Lange, T., Starkopf, L., Westerlund, H., Madsen, I., Rugulies,
R., Pentti, J., Stenholm, S., Vahtera, J., Hansen, Å., Virtanen, M., Kivimäki, M., & Rod,
N. (2019). Workplace bullying and workplace violence as risk factors for cardiovascular
disease: a multi-cohort study. European Heart Journal, 40(14), 1124–1134.
Xu, T., Magnusson Hanson, L., Lange, T., Starkopf, L., Westerlund, H., Madsen, I., Rugulies,
R., Pentti, J., Stenholm, S., Vahtera, J., Hansen, Å., Kivimäki, M., & Rod, N. (2018).
Workplace bullying and violence as risk factors for type 2 diabetes: a multicohort study
and meta-analysis. Diabetologia, 61(1), 75–83.

92
Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to be a part of my study. As we discussed before, this study is
being conducted under the oversight of the University of Southern California as part of the
completion of my doctoral degree. The results here will be used for my dissertation and potential
publication. If you recall from the informed consent form provided previously, you have the right
to discontinue participation or skip any question at any time.
1) Can you tell me a little about yourself professionally?
If you recall, in the recruitment materials, this project is looking specifically at workplace
bullying. Please share as much or as little as you are comfortable with. This next set of questions
could be difficult.
2) Can you tell me what you think about when you hear the words “workplace bullying”?
I’d like to take a break here and check in with you to see how you are doing. I also want
to remind you about self-soothing and the ability to withdraw from the project at any time. The
power is in your hands, not mine.
3) Can you tell me about your experience of workplace bullying?
4) When did you experience workplace bullying? (How long ago?)
5) How did you try to address being bullied in the workplace?
a. What external resources did you access to address workplace bullying, if any?
6) Did the workplace where you experienced workplace bullying have an anti-workplace
bullying policy?
7) What other mechanisms existed to address workplace bullying at the workplace where
you experienced this?
8) Are you still employed at the workplace where you experienced workplace bullying at?

93
a. If not, why did you leave?
Thank you for sharing. I understand this may be incredibly difficult. If you’re
comfortable with it, I would love to hear what you think could be done about it to make it better
for yourself or the organization as a whole.
9) What policies or interventions do you think would address workplace bullying, if any?
10) What other resources would have helped address workplace bullying either inside or
outside of your workplace?
11) What other resources would have helped you address the effects of workplace bullying
on you?
12) Is there anything else we need to talk about?
Thank you for sharing your insights on what you think would make a difference. I
appreciate your participation in this project. If you’re comfortable with it, I will send you a
transcript of your interview for your review to correct anything that may have been transcribed
incorrectly and to add any additional insights if you feel an answer needs clarification. As a
reminder, these transcripts will be de-identified and held until the final dissertation is approved;
then, they will be destroyed.
We have put together some resources, if you’re interested, for accessing mental health
support. I will send that to you along with the transcript of your interview for your review. Thank
you again. Please feel free to contact me or my dissertation chair, Dr. Monique Datta, if there’s
anything you believe we’ve missed.

94
Ethics
Dempsey et al. (2016) noted that all qualitative interviews may cause distress to
participants, and even discussing sensitive topics may cause them harm. The researchers then
championed the needs of participants and provided ethical guidelines for qualitative researchers
when conducting research on sensitive topics, including confidentiality, informed consent, and
anonymity, key considerations. They went further with an additional recommendation for a risk
assessment and distress protocols.
As part of informed consent, participants were notified that they may decline to answer
any questions during the interview. Before the interviews, the participants were asked for their
explicit consent. They were also asked to acknowledge their explicit consent in the screening
survey before the interview. As the researcher, I read a paragraph to the participants, informing
them about how the information collected in the interviews would be used and the steps that
would be taken to protect the participant’s identity. Following Dempsey et al.’s framework, the
participants were informed that all information about their identity, organization, and other
identifiable details they shared during the interview would be anonymized. All individual
transcripts, recordings, summaries, and findings were made available to be previewed by the
individual participants to receive their explicit consent for the inclusion of their anonymized
information. This preview also allowed participants to review and approve the level of redaction,
anonymizing, and characterization of their responses. After transcription, review of the data,
analysis of the data, and completion of the degree, all information gathered will be disposed of
within 30 days of approval of this dissertation by the University of Southern California.
In support of the recommendation to include both a risk assessment and distress
protocols, a risk assessment was used to screen potential participants, and a threshold determined

95
that if a participant exceeded, would have eliminated them from participating in the study in
service of their health and well-being. A distress protocol also helped the researcher look for,
identify, and mitigate distress during the interviews. This included stopping or abandoning an
interview session if the participant’s stress level exceeds the established threshold to continue.
This study was proposed to the University of Southern California’s IRB for review and approval.
In line with the university’s requirements and to protect the health and well-being of potential
participants, no information was gathered before the IRB’s review and approval of this study.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Leadership psychological safety: exploring its development and relationship with leader-member exchange theory

PDF

Fostering a climate that prevents workplace bullying

PDF

“Black” workplace belonging: an examination of the lived experiences of Black faculty sense of belonging factors in community colleges

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

The development of change leadership skills in aspiring community college leaders

PDF

Black women in tech: examining experiences in tech industry workplaces

PDF

Examining the pandemic’s impact on remote worker wellness in community colleges: organizational lessons and strategies

PDF

Minding the gender gap: self-efficacy and women senior leadership roles in banking

PDF

How teachers identify and respond to bullying: an evaluation study

PDF

Black brilliance in leadership: increasing the number of Black women in the senior executive service

PDF

Impact of job insecurity on intergenerational knowledge sharing among machinists in the United States

PDF

Enduring in silence: understanding the intersecting challenges of women living with multiple sclerosis in the workplace

PDF

Breaking barriers to leadership: what's the best solution?

PDF

Ambient anxiety within leadership teams and its impact on organizational efficiency in mental health organizations

PDF

Secrets from the C-suite: women leaders on the bridging gap

PDF

The inconsistency of teachers reporting and intervening in bullying situations: an evaluation study

PDF

Autistic people’s experiences during the employment process

PDF

Leadership in turbulent times: a social cognitive study of responsible leaders

PDF

Workplace neurodiverse equity

PDF

Bridging the empathy gap: a mixed-method approach to evaluating teacher support in bullying prevention and intervention at an urban middle school in India

Asset Metadata

Creator Lally, Melissa Anne (author)

Core Title Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-08

Publication Date 08/27/2024

Defense Date 08/08/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag bully,bullying,human resources,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational change,organizational culture,organizational policies,target,women in leadership,women leaders,workplace bullying

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Lynch, Douglas (committee member)

Creator Email mel.lally@gmail.com,mlally@usc.edu

Unique identifier UC113999U1N

Identifier etd-LallyMelis-13438.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-LallyMelis-13438

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Lally, Melissa Anne

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240828-usctheses-batch-1203 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu