Dissertation Final

A CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS: PERCEPTIONS OF WORKPLACE BULLYING
AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT AMONG IT PROFESSIONALS
by
Cynthia V. Marcello
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Management in Organizational Leadership and
Information Systems and Technology
University of Phoenix
December 2009
© 2009 by Cynthia V. Marcello
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
A CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS: PERCEPTIONS OF WORKPLACE BULLYING
AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT AMONG IT PROFESSIONALS
By
Cynthia V. Marcello
December 2009
Approved:
Robert Braudy, Ph.D., Mentor
Michelle Carmel, Ph.D., Committee Member
Arlene Sullivan, Ph.D., Committee Member
Accepted and Signed:

Date

Date

Date
_________________
Jeremy Moreland, Ph.D. Date
Dean, School of Advanced Studies
University of Phoenix
iv
ABSTRACT
Workplace bullying reporting in the United States has steadily risen in the last twenty
years. There is limited research in the United States on the prevalence and forms of
workplace bullying in different work industry sectors and the information technology
(IT) sector is one that is not represented in extant research on workplace bullying. This
study investigated the prevalence of workplace bullying among IT professionals and the
relationship between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. The research
study found that IT professionals are frequently exposed to workplace bullying and that
psychological empowerment is negatively correlated to workplace bullying. The study
also found that IT professionals are exposed to work-related forms of workplace bullying
more frequently than personal forms of workplace bullying. IT professionals in the
executive job type report less exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals
working in non-executive job types. The key findings of this study (a) provided the
frequency and forms of exposure to workplace bullying by IT professionals and (b)
determined the degree and direction of the relationship between workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. The limitations of this study
and suggestions for future research are discussed.

v
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this work to the individuals I have met over my lifetime
who have inspired and motivated me during this educational journey. I thank God for the
strength He has given me to discover more of my inner strength and resilience throughout
this experience. I would also like to dedicate this work to all of the targets of workplace
bullying throughout the world. May you find the strength to meet each and every day
with a new determination to stand resilient and empowered in spite of the toxicity waiting
to consume your happiness and joy. Make this day the last day that you assume the role
of target!
vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank all of those people who supported this endeavor, including
family, friends, doctoral cohort, committee, mentor, and fellow colleagues. To my
husband, John, who spent many days and nights alone while I toiled on my doctoral
work, I want to thank you for your patience and understanding. I am eternally grateful to
my mentor, Dr. Robert Braudy and my committee members, Dr. Michelle Carmel, and
Dr. Arlene Sullivan for the guidance provided to me during this process. I appreciate their
encouragement, feedback, and support along the journey.

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ xii
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... xiv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................2
Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................6
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................7
Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................8
Significance to the IT Profession ........................................................................................ 8
Significance to Leadership................................................................................................ 11
Nature of the Study ............................................................................................................12
Research Questions ............................................................................................................16
Hypotheses .........................................................................................................................17
Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................................19
Social Exchange Theory ................................................................................................... 20
Theories Used to Explain Workplace Bullying ................................................................ 21
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................23
Assumptions.......................................................................................................................27
Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations ...............................................................................27
Summary ............................................................................................................................29
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........................................................... 31
Documentation ...................................................................................................................34
Workplace Bullying ...........................................................................................................35

viii
Workplace Bullying Defined ............................................................................................ 35
Historical Overview of Workplace Bullying .................................................................... 38
Social Exchange Theory ................................................................................................... 45
Power and Social Exchange .............................................................................................. 47
Bases of Social Power ....................................................................................................... 48
Structural Sources of Intra-Organizational Power ............................................................ 50
Current Perspectives on Workplace Bullying ....................................................................51
Prevalence ......................................................................................................................... 56
Forms of Workplace Bullying .......................................................................................... 57
Antecedents of Workplace Bullying ................................................................................. 58
Enabling Structures and Processes.................................................................................... 63
Motivating Structures and Processes ................................................................................ 64
Precipitating Structures and Processes.............................................................................. 65
Influence of Workplace Bullying...................................................................................... 66
Work Sectors at Risk for Workplace Bullying ................................................................. 67
The IT Work Sector .......................................................................................................... 70
Psychological Empowerment.............................................................................................73
Historical Overview .......................................................................................................... 73
Empowerment Perspectives .............................................................................................. 74
The Psychological Empowerment Process ....................................................................... 76
Psychological Empowerment as a Mitigating Factor in Workplace Bullying.................. 79
Current Trends ...................................................................................................................83
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................85
ix
Summary ............................................................................................................................86
CHAPTER 3: METHOD .................................................................................................. 88
Research Design.................................................................................................................88
Hypotheses .........................................................................................................................89
Appropriateness of Design.................................................................................................93
Internal Validity .................................................................................................................96
External Validity ................................................................................................................97
Research Questions ............................................................................................................97
Population and Sampling Frame ........................................................................................98
Informed Consent...............................................................................................................99
Geographic Location ........................................................................................................101
Summary ..........................................................................................................................107
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS .................................................................................................108
Research Design and Method ..........................................................................................109
Data Collection Procedures..............................................................................................110
Sample and Demographics ..............................................................................................112
Data Analysis Procedures ............................................................................................... 118
Test of Hypotheses/Findings............................................................................................120
Summary of Findings .......................................................................................................132
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................134
Findings and Interpretation ..............................................................................................137
Hypothesis 1.....................................................................................................................138
Hypothesis 2.....................................................................................................................139
x
Hypothesis 3.....................................................................................................................140
Hypothesis 4.....................................................................................................................142
Hypothesis 5.....................................................................................................................143
Hypothesis 6.....................................................................................................................144
Instrumentation ............................................................................................................... 145
Sampling Errors .............................................................................................................. 145
Power in Leadership ....................................................................................................... 148
Demand for Leadership in IT .......................................................................................... 149
Empowerment as an Enabler .......................................................................................... 150
Leadership Roles in the Organization ............................................................................. 152
Recommendations for Future Research ...........................................................................153
Replication of This Study ............................................................................................... 153
Improving Response Rate ............................................................................................... 153
Additional Methods and Measurement Options ............................................................. 154
Recommendations for AITP ............................................................................................154
Recommendations for Leadership ...................................................................................155
Summary ..........................................................................................................................155
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 157
APPENDIX A: SIGNED INFORMED CONSENT: PERMISSION TO USE
PREMISES ......................................................................................................................181
APPENDIX B: SIGNED INFORMED CONSENT: INTRODUCTORY LETTER
AND INFORMED CONSENT FOR PARTICIPANTS OVER 18 YEARS OF
AGE .................................................................................................................................183
xi
APPENDIX C: SCRIPT FOR COMMUNICATION WITH STUDY
PARTICIPANTS .............................................................................................................186
APPENDIX D: PERMISSION TO USE NEGATIVE ACTS QUESTIONNAIRE ...... 188
APPENDIX E: PERMISSION TO USE PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT
INSTRUMENT ................................................................................................................190
APPENDIX F: NEGATIVE ACTS QUESTIONNAIRE (NAQ-R) ...............................192
APPENDIX G: PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT INSTRUMENT .................. 196
APPENDIX H: DOCUMENTATION ............................................................................ 198
APPENDIX I: MODEL FOR WORKPLACE BULLYING .......................................... 205
APPENDIX J: FREQUENCY COUNTS FOR NAQ QUESTIONS ............................. 207
APPENDIX K: BULLYING DEGREE SCORES ......................................................... 211

xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Literature Review Themes ................................................................31
Table 2 Independent, Dependent and Other Variables .....................................................95
Table 3 NAQ-R Behavioral Anchor Points ......................................................................101
Table 4 Psychological Empowerment Instrument Behavioral Anchor Points.................103
Table 5 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Age Variable .......................................112
Table 6 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Gender Variable..................................112
Table 7 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Marital Status Variable.......................113
Table 8 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Education Variable .............................113
Table 9 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Ethnicity Variable ...............................114
Table 10 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Job Type Variable .............................114
Table 11 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Employment Status Variable .............115
Table 12 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Organization Type Variable .............115
Table 13 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Employees in Workplace Variable ....115
Table 14 Correlations among Workplace Bullying and Psychological Empowerment ..121
Table 15 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Negative Acts Exposure ....................122
Table 16 Correlations among Responses for Two Measures of Workplace Bullying .....123
Table 17 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Forms of Workplace Bullying
Exposure ..........................................................................................................................125
Table 18 T-test Results on Gender Differences in Perceiving Psychological
Empowerment ..................................................................................................................126
Table 19 Results of Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances for Gender Differences in
Perceiving Psychological Empowerment ........................................................................127

xiii
Table 20 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Bullying Exposure by Job Type ........129
Table 21 Frequency Counts and Percentages for Bullying Exposure by Work Sector ..130
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Enabling, motivating, and precipitating structures and processes in the work
environment that contribute to bullying.............................................................................65
Figure 2. Model of workplace bullying ...........................................................................205

1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Workplace bullying is described as a phenomenon in which one or more
individuals perceive themselves as a defenseless target of the negative acts of one or
more individuals (Namie, 2007). Workplace bullying reporting in the United States is
becoming more prevalent due to the resulting negative impact on individuals, families,
businesses, the economy, and society (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al.,
2007, Tracy, & Alberts, 2007; Namie; Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007; Vega & Comer,
2005). Understanding workplace bullying and the impact on the systemic organizational
environment may provide valuable insight to organization leaders, thereby empowering
the organization as a whole to engage in positive best practices resulting in more
favorable workplace environments (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007,
Tracy, & Alberts, 2007).
There is limited research in the United States on the prevalence and forms of
workplace bullying in different work industry sectors (Namie, 2007). The information
technology (IT) sector is one that is not represented in extant research on workplace
bullying. The study described in this dissertation examined the extent to which IT
professionals perceived being exposed to operationally-defined negative acts of
workplace bullying and self-identification as targets or witnesses, and the extent to which
those IT professionals perceive psychological empowerment. The study assisted in the
determination of the degree and direction of a possible relationship between IT
professionals’ perceptions of workplace bullying exposure and perceptions of
psychological empowerment.
2
This chapter is an overview of the study comprised of the background
information, statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, and the significance to
leadership in general and in the IT profession as well as the extant research on workplace
bullying. Numerous researchers in several studies, both within and outside the United
States, have emphasized the necessity for future investigation into the phenomenon of
workplace bullying in order to better understand the problem and to develop solutions
(Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007; Tracy, Lutgen-Sandvik, & Alberts, 2006;
Vega & Comer, 2005). Increasing awareness to the problem of workplace bullying could
permit organizations to improve the workplace environment by lessening or eliminating
the negative outcomes associated with workplace bullying. Chapter 1 focuses on the
background of the problem, the problem statement, the purpose of the study, and the
significance and nature of the study. Research questions, hypotheses, a theoretical
framework, definition of terms, assumptions made for the study, the scope of the study,
limitations, and delimitations of the research are also reviewed in Chapter 1.
Background of the Problem
Workplace bullying reporting in the United States has steadily risen in the last
twenty years. Individuals, families, businesses, and society as a whole have all been
impacted in a negative manner (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007;
Namie, 2007; Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007; Vega & Comer, 2005). A large percentage
of research on workplace bullying has occurred in European and Nordic countries
(Matthiesen & Einarsen, 2007; Rayner & Keashly, 2005; Skogstad, Matthiesen et al.,
2007), but research in the United States is minimal (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.). Researchers
outside of the United States have found that workplace bullying is a prevalent problem in
3
many countries and work environments (McDonald & Dear, 2008; Matthiesen &
Einarsen; Olafsson & Johannsdottir, 2004; Skogstad et al.; Rayner & Keashly).
In highly industrialized societies, evidence from increased reporting of workplace
bullying has led some investigators to conclude that the incidence and severity of
occupational violence and bullying are increasing (Mayhew et al., 2004). In a study that
focused on bullying prevalence among Danish workers, targets of workplace bullying
were found to have short- and long-term health problems, including psychological and
psychosomatic stress symptoms (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2001). According to Namie
(2007), targets often experience feelings of dread, isolation, demoralization, and the
inability to escape or prevent being bullied. Numerous researchers have found that the
more frequent the target experiences psychological trauma, the more dangerous the
outcome and the longer the recovery rate, if recovery is even possible (Namie).
According to Lutgen-Sandvik et al. (2007), U.S. researchers have focused on
many negative acts at work, but bullying as contextualized by the international studies
have not been thoroughly investigated. Overall, research is lacking in the United States
(Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007). Although Carroll M. Brodsky’s book, The
Harassed Worker, was written during the 1970s in an effort to increase workplace abuse
awareness in the United States, the book did not generate much interest with regard to
research. In the 1990s, however, as workplace violence episodes became more prolific,
people in general and the research community became more interested in understanding
the dynamics of workplace issues (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.; Namie). In the last decade,
researchers have found that workplace bullying has negative consequences on the health,
well-being, and economic welfare of individuals and families as well as the climate and
4
business interests of organizations (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al.;
Namie, 2007; Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007; Vega & Comer, 2005).
A national study on workplace aggression prevalence in the U.S. workforce was
conducted from January 2002 to June 2003 in order to understand the demographic
predictors (Kelloway, Barling, & Hurrell, 2006). The researchers used a survey to
question 2,829 U.S. workers between the ages of 18 and 65 in a variety of industries. The
results of the study showed that 41% of the U.S. workers had been exposed to
psychological acts (verbal abuse) of aggression during a 12-month period (Kelloway et
al.).
In a survey conducted by Namie and Namie (2003), individuals who had been
targets of workplace bullying were found to suffer from numerous health issues,
including, but not limited to, anxiety, depression, alcohol and other substance abuse, self-
destructive habits, sleep disturbances, and both homicidal and suicidal ideation and
tendencies. There is a lack of overall knowledge of the complex dynamics involved and
the short- and long-term outcomes that bullying has on society overall (Lutgen-Sandvik
et al, 2007; Namie & Namie; Namie, 2007; Simon & Simon, 2006). Although bullying
has been found to produce a wide variety of negative outcomes throughout the United
States, in many states the mistreatment of workers on the job is not legally actionable.
Targets of workplace bullying do not meet harassment criteria for members of protected
classes as defined in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Namie & Namie).
The economic influence of workplace bullying has been reported as detrimental
for both the employee and the employer (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Namie, 2007; Namie &
Namie, 2003; Simon & Simon, 2006). Based on a survey conducted in 2003, 51% of
5
employee respondents to a survey lost income as a result of excessive sick leave or
quitting the job. In some cases, the only thing that made bullying stop was to leave the
place of employment; for some workers, the possibility of reintegrating back into the
workforce was difficult. In that same survey, 11% of respondents transferred but kept the
same jobs with that employer, 38% left voluntarily for self-preservation, and 44% were
expelled by a method controlled by the employer (Namie; Namie & Namie).
The societal influence of bullying involves the damaging effects to social
relationships. Employees on the job either isolate themselves out of fear of further
bullying or become isolated because of being ostracized by coworkers (Namie, 2007;
Namie & Namie, 2003). Family support tends to ebb and flow between offering words of
empowerment to encouraging the target to compromise with the bully. The level of stress
experienced by the family causes strained relationships between family members,
including the children. Personal friends of the target begin to limit the relationship to
avoid exposure to the stress of the situation (Namie & Namie). In some cases, spousal
disagreements about the role that the target’s spouse has in the bullying situation lead to
separation or divorce.
The damage of workplace bullying is costly to organizations, communities, and
families, and may explain why IT workers are in short supply in the United States.
According to Maudgalya, Wallace, Daraiseh, and Salem (2006), the IT workplace
experiences a high rate of burnout, turnover, absenteeism, and decreased productivity due
to excessive demands in work hours, strict deadlines, intimidation, information
withholding, and budget constraints. The exposure to risk factors makes the IT worker
especially prone to unfavorable work-related problems such as job stress, burnout, and
6
job dissatisfaction. Workplace bullying has been related to the aforementioned risk
factors (Keashly & Neuman, 2005; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007), so there is
a possibility that a link exists between workplace bullying and the IT work environment.
According to Maudgalya et al. (2006), the economic influence to the employer is
decreased employee productivity, attrition and absenteeism, an overall decline in work
quality, and dissatisfied customers. The additional costs of recruiting, retraining, and
establishing a new employee can actually surpass the costs of an employee’s total annual
compensation package (Maudgalya et al.).
Numerous researchers have cited the need for increasing overall societal
awareness of the phenomena of workplace bullying and related outcomes (Hodson,
Roscigno, & Lopez, 2006; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007; Namie & Namie,
2003). The lack of legislative protection for targets of bullying is a considerable concern
(Lutgen-Sandvik et al.; Namie & Namie; Simon & Simon, 2006). Because bullying
behavior does not fall under acts of discrimination as defined in the statutory code,
targets of bullying are not considered a class of people in need of protection (Simon &
Simon; Yamada, 2006). The U.S. legal code does not encourage employers to address the
issue of workplace bullying through corrective or preventive action (Namie).
Statement of the Problem
A general problem related to workplace bullying in the United States and other
countries is that targets of workplace bullying are known to have short- and long term-
health problems, including psychological and psychosomatic stress symptoms so severe
that in some cases, the target suffers permanently or commits homicide or suicide
(Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2001; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Martin, 2008; Namie, 2007;
7
Workplace Bullying Institute, 2008). According to Neuman and Baron (2003), targets
often experience feelings of dread, isolation, demoralization, and the inability to escape
or prevent being bullied.
Extant research on workplace bullying is limited to certain work environments
and the findings cannot be generalized to other work environments (Lutgen-Sandvik et
al., 2007; Namie, 2007; Salin, 2008). The specific problem this study addressed was the
need to quantify, analyze, and explain the extent of the prevalence and relationship
between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work
environment and the degree of association between workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment. This quantitative method correlational research study collected and
analyzed data collected from IT professionals in order to examine the extent to which
workplace bullying and psychological empowerment exists, and whether a relationship
exists between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative correlational study was to conduct an empirical
investigation to determine the extent to which a relationship exists between workplace
bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. This research also
looked at how often workplace bullying occurs and in what forms, and the extent to
which IT professionals perceive themselves on four dimensions of psychological
empowerment. Independent variables were workplace bullying, gender, job type, and
work sector (public or private); the dependent variables were psychological
empowerment and workplace bullying. An analysis was conducted to determine if there

8
are any particular groups at risk for workplace bullying that are based on gender, job
type, and work sector (public or private).
The ideal research methodology is quantitative, using a descriptive explanatory
correlational survey design to collect and analyze “data at one point in time” (Creswell,
2005, p. 355). The rationale for performing this method of collection and analysis is that
numerical values will be used for the purpose of comparisons and determining whether
relationships exist between variables. Time constraints and the inability to allocate the
necessary financial resources prohibit a longitudinal study from being conducted at this
time.
A correlation is a statistical test that can detect a consistency in variation, or
covariance, between two or more variables (Creswell, 2005). The current study
investigated the extent to which a relationship exists between workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. Data were analyzed using
descriptive statistics, comparisons, and correlational analyses. The specific population
group that was studied was 1,500 IT professional members of the Association of
Information Technology Professionals (AITP) working in the United States and the
sample was determined based on who volunteered to participate in the study. One of the
objectives for this study included that the findings from this investigation would further
the existing knowledge related to workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Significance of the Study
Significance to the IT Profession
In the last 30 years, the field of IT has been elevated by the market to one of the
most important industry sectors on a global economic scale. Working in the IT profession
9
can prove lucrative, but the profession as a whole has been experiencing difficulty
retaining the IT workforce (Maudgalya et al., 2006). Based on interviews that have been
conducted in various studies of IT workers, the IT profession has been found to be
stressful (Ahuja, 2007; Hetland et al., 2007; Maudgalya et al.; Messersmith, 2007; Rose,
2007).
In order to maintain a sustained competitive advantage in the tech industry and to
adequately respond to constant change in the IT environment, many IT workers are
forced to push physical and mental limits (Ahuja; Hetland et al.; Maudgalya et al.;
Messersmith; Rose, 2007). Heavy workloads, time constraints, and hectic work
environments cause a high degree of stress and the inability to cope (Lutgen-Sandvik et
al., 2007; Fox & Stallworth, 2005; Namie, 2007; Richmond & Skitmore, 2006; Sweeney,
2007). In previous studies, researchers found that the degree of bullying was positively
correlated to stress and workplace negativity (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.; Salin, 2003, 2007).
Stressful work environments are known to produce workplace bullying as a related
outcome (Carayon, Schoepke, Hoonakker, Haims, & Brunette, 2006; Hauge, Skogstad, &
Einarsen, 2007; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007). High stress levels create a work
environment conducive to workplace bullying, job dissatisfaction, decreased
productivity, disempowerment, lower aggression thresholds, and turnover (Namie).
Increasing knowledge about workplace bullying and psychological empowerment may
improve the workplace environment and outcomes for IT professionals.
The IT environment has been found to possess the enabling and precipitating
structures cited as risk factors for workplace bullying (Maudgalya et al., 2006;
Messersmith, 2007; Rose, 2007; Sethi, King, & Quick, 2004). Because the prevalence of
10
workplace bullying has been observed in other stressful professions and stressful work
environments are known to produce workplace bullying as a related outcome, workplace
bullying may be present in the IT workplace.
Absenteeism, burnout, turnover intention, and overall occupational stress are
prevalent in the IT work environment (Ahuja et al., 2007; Hetland et al., 2007;
Maudgalya et al., 2006; Rose, 2007). The financial costs associated with high rates of
absenteeism and replacing staff due to turnover related to negative exposure variables are
significant. There are direct costs associated with turnover such as the expenses to
interview candidates and relocate new hires, training and professional development costs.
Indirect costs include productivity loss, training of new employee, and loss of
institutional knowledge. The average cost to replace the IT professional can range from
twice to seven times the worker’s salary, depending on circumstances (Maudgalya et al.).
Additional awareness about workplace bullying could improve the IT work
environment and offer a cost savings for the employer. Specifically, the improvements
may be, but are not limited to, a decrease in the costs related to absenteeism, high
turnover, poor productivity, personnel replacement, and negative organizational culture.
This framework determined the prevalence and forms of workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment, thereby providing an increased
awareness to employees, employers, employee assistance programs, legislators,
researchers, and therapists. The knowledge gained could serve as an impetus for further
investigation and research, facilitate the development of occupational health and public
policies, and the development and implementation of interventions and training programs
11
designed to improve the work environment through the cultivation of positive outcomes
(Namie & Namie, 2003; Namie, 2007, Workplace Bullying Institute, 2008).
Significance to Leadership
Leadership is considered to be fundamental in creating competitive advantages in
IT (Hetland et al., 2007; Skogstad, Einarsen et al., 2007; Choi, 2007). Communication,
relationships, organizational culture, and psycho-social factors are all influenced by the
examples set forth by the leaders of the organization. According to Maudgalya et al.
(2006), the well-being of the IT organizational culture is essential in order to save
organizations money and improve stakeholder value. Cost savings and improved
stakeholder value can be facilitated by ensuring that communication systems and dyadic
interaction between leadership, managers, and the IT professionals are adequate
(Maudgalya et al.). A large part of workplace bullying involves poor or dysfunctional
communication between individuals (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Salin, 2008).
In order for the IT work environment to effectively align organizational goals and
objectives, leadership of the IT organization needs to empower employees to bring about
increased commitment and productivity (Hetland et al., 2007; Skogstad, Einarsen et al.,
2007). IT managers could set an example as effective empowering role models by
motivating IT workers through meaningful work (Hetland et al.; Skogstad et al.).
The goal of this study was to determine if workplace bullying is a problem in the
IT work environment. This research also probed into whether psychological
empowerment was present and could serve as a possible mitigating factor to workplace
bullying (Krishna, 2007). In increasing the awareness of leadership on the benefits of
changing the organizational culture to one that permits effective communication and an
12
organizational culture that fosters respect, positive change could be established as a
desirable objective of the organization.
The knowledge gained from studies in workplace bullying could assist leaders in
the transformation of the workforce through the identification of the critical success
factors related to problems involving human capital issues in a work environment with a
heavy emphasis on information and knowledge (Niederman, Griffeth, & Ferratt, 2006;
Hetland et al., 2007; Skogstad, Einarsen et al., 2007; Choi, 2007). According to Yamada
(2004), identifying the health-related stakeholders and providing them information about
workplace bullying could influence policy makers to instill better workplace practices.
Training programs, intervention and prevention strategies, and policies have to be
developed by leadership to address the problem of workplace bullying to improve the
workplace culture (Namie, 2007; Workplace Bullying Institute, 2008; Yamada). In
providing increased awareness to employees, employers, legislators, and therapists, the
knowledge gained could facilitate the development of the best occupational health
practices, public policy, and the creation and implementation of interventions and
training programs (Namie; Yamada). New practices may emerge for dealing with the
stressors of the IT workplace environment.
Nature of the Study
This quantitative, correlational research study examined the extent to which IT
professionals perceived exposure to behaviorally-defined negative acts of workplace
bullying (independent variable) over the last six months and how often, whether
participants perceived themselves as bullied or witness to bullying over the last six
months based on a specific definition of bullying and how often, and whether participants
13
perceived themselves as psychologically empowered. The study determined the degree
and direction of the relationship between IT professionals’ perceptions of workplace
bullying and perceptions of psychological empowerment. Quantitative analyses permit
the making of inferences, understanding of relationships between variables, and testing of
theoretical constructs (Creswell, 2005). Although correlation does not imply causation,
“The existence of a high correlation does permit prediction” (Gay & Airasian, 2003, p.
312). A positive correlation between workplace bullying and negative workplace
outcomes, such as absenteeism, turnover intention, burnout and job dissatisfaction,
occupational stress, disempowerment, and perpetual workplace bullying, may be
interpreted as a justifying the need for the development of intervention and training
programs to address the underlying problem and resulting outcomes.
The Association of Information Technology Professionals (AITP) is a
professional organization with members from different AITP chapters in various states.
The sampling frame was limited to IT professionals who work in the United States.
Utilizing a structured survey reduced interpreter bias and was a cost-effective means of
promoting a consistent method of retrieving data. An online version of the Negative Acts
Questionnaire (NAQ-R) (Einarsen, Raknes, Matthiesen et al., 1994), an instrument
designed to measure the perception of being exposed to bullying at work, was combined
consecutively with an online version of the Psychological Empowerment Instrument
(Spreitzer, 1995) in order to survey a convenience sample from the AITP membership
database. Demographic variable data were gathered at the beginning of the online survey.
The entire questionnaire surveyed the IT professionals’ perceptions of being exposed to
workplace bullying and perceived psychological empowerment.

14
A quantitative approach was favored over a qualitative approach due to the
quantifiable research objectives (Creswell, 2003). A qualitative research study would be
more appropriate for cases in which exploration, observation, interviews, and in-depth
interpretation was the goal of the research (Creswell). The primary focus of this study
was to quantify and describe the prevalence and forms of workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment to the extent that a possible relationship exists between
workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. A qualitative research design was
found to be inadequate for quantifying the frequencies, means, variances, relationships,
and reliabilities needed for this study. This study and related research questions and
hypotheses could only be addressed using statistical analysis that permits grouping and
performance comparisons on the data (Creswell).
Two validated instruments were administered to a sample of IT professionals
working in the United States. The NAQ-R was used as a tool for measuring perceived
exposure to bullying and victimization at the workplace (Einarsen, Raknes, Matthiesen &
Hellesøy, 1994). The questionnaire consists of 22 items written in behavioral terms, but
with no reference to the term bullying. Factor analysis performed by Einarsen and Hoel
revealed two factors: (a) personal bullying (12 items), and (b) work-related bullying (8
items). Internal reliability has been reported at .87 for personal bullying and .81 for work-
related bullying. An additional two questions assess whether respondents perceive
themselves as bullied or witness based on a specific definition of bullying and witnessing
bullting respectively. These questions were not related to the factor analysis performed
by Einarsen and Hoel, but were later added by them to determine to what extent the
respondent self-identifies with being bullied or having witnessed bullying.

15
Researchers have established high internal consistency for the instrument, with
Cronbach’s alpha ranging from .87 to .93 (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2001; Salin, 2001).
According to Einarsen & Hoel (2001), studies show a correlation between the scale with
measures of job satisfaction, ranging from r = -.24 to r = -.44; measures of psychological
health and well being, ranging from r = -.31 to r = -.52; and with measures of
psychosomatic complaints (r = .32).
Although there are numerous measures available for measuring empowerment,
many measures use definitions and constructs that differ from the objectives of this study.
A 12-item psychological empowerment instrument developed by empowerment
researcher Spreitzer (1995) was used to measure the four self-orientation dimensions of
psychological empowerment in the workplace as defined by Thomas and Velthouse
(1990): (a) meaning, (b) competence, (c) self-determination, and (d) impact. Meaning
involves the congruence between behavior, one’s beliefs, values and the role served at
work as a mechanism for creating a purposeful goal-oriented work ethic. Competence is
the belief in one’s abilities to accomplish the work task. Self-determination is the idea
that a person has the choice to engage in actions to accomplish a goal in the workplace.
Impact is the belief that what one does matters and can influence the goals and objectives
of an organization.
The instrument has been used successfully in numerous studies investigating
different work environments and demonstrates test-retest reliability for the dimensions at
.80. The instrument also demonstrates a Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency
ranging from .62 to .72 for the whole instrument and from .79 to .85 for the subscales.
Spreitzer’s Psychological Empowerment Instrument was chosen over other available

16
instruments because of the focus of the instrument on self-orientation that individuals
have with work roles and this best matches the inquiry goals of this study.
Research Questions
Research questions were established to address some of the limitations that exist
in previous studies conducted on workplace bullying. Primarily, the prevalence and forms
of workplace bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment have
not been examined previously. Differences of gender, job type, and work sector (public
or private) in IT professionals related to workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment and the nature of the relationship between workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment have not been explored in the extant research.
The research study was based on the following research questions:
R1 What is the relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment in the IT work environment?
R2 How frequently are IT professionals exposed to workplace bullying?
R3 What forms of workplace bullying are IT professionals exposed to?
R4 How do male IT professionals differ from females in terms of perceiving
psychological empowerment?
R5 Do IT professionals in the executive job type perceive less frequent
exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who are not in the executive job
type?
R6 Do IT professionals who work in the public sector report a higher
frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work in the
private sector?
17
Hypotheses
The following hypothesis was examined to determine whether an association or
covariance exists between frequency of exposure to workplace bullying and perceptions
of psychological empowerment.
H10 There is no relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment in the IT work environment.
H11 There is a relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
The psychological perspective of empowerment is based on those psychological
factors that cause individuals to feel control in their personal lives. Personal efficacy is
achieved through the motivation to perform tasks and the belief in capability of oneself to
perform said tasks (Bandura, 1994). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) posited that
empowerment was a multidimensional construct comprised of four cognitions. The
motivation that the empowered employee experienced and the individual’s perception of
work role was divided into the following four dimensions: (1) meaningfulness, (2)
competence, (3) choice or self-determination, and (4) sense of impact.
The following hypotheses were evaluated to determine the prevalence and forms
of workplace bullying as target or witness and the perceptions of psychological
empowerment based on four dimensions. An evaluation of the existence of statistical
differences between gender, job type, and work sector (public or private) as related to
perception of workplace bullying exposure and psychological empowerment was
conducted.
18
H20 IT professionals are not frequently exposed to workplace bullying.
H21 IT professionals are frequently exposed to workplace bullying.
H30 IT professionals will not report a higher frequency of exposure to work-
related bullying than personal bullying.
H31 IT professionals will report a higher frequency of exposure to work-related
bullying than personal bullying.
H40 There is no statistical difference in perceptions of psychological
empowerment between male and female IT professionals.
H41 There is a statistical difference in perceptions of psychological
H50 IT professionals in the executive job type will not report a lower frequency
of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who are not in the executive job
type.
H51 IT professionals in the executive job type will report a lower frequency of
type.
H60 IT professionals who work in the public work sector will not report a
higher frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work in
the private work sector.
H61 IT professionals who work in the public work sector will report a higher
private work sector.

19
This investigative process integrated the quantitative method and a correlational
design to provide organizations with the additional knowledge that may lead to the
identification of risk factors related to workplace bullying. Possible mitigation value of
psychological empowerment may be identified as relevant which could lead to the
enhancement of administrative, public, and legislative policies that address the issue of
workplace bullying. Strategies for the overall improvement related to reducing the
negative outcomes for employees and employers were also identified.
Theoretical Framework
This study intended to examine the extent to which IT professionals perceive
exposure to operationally-defined negative acts of workplace bullying as target or
witness, and to determine the degree and direction of a possible relationship between IT
professionals’ perceptions of workplace bullying and perceptions of psychological
empowerment. Workplace bullying has been investigated from numerous theoretical
framework areas, including: (1) stress; (2) social learning; (3) attribution; (4) conflict; (5)
social interaction; (6) organizational chaos; and (7) relational power.
A general theoretical foundation has been presented as germane to the
understanding of workplace bullying; however, for the purposes of this investigation,
only social exchange theory will be emphasized. While the primary focus of the research
study will be the influence of workplace bullying on the IT industry, references to other
major fields and industries will be necessary in order to frame the research and
multidisciplinary approach associated with the overall analysis, conclusions, and
recommendations of the research.

20
Social Exchange Theory
Social exchange theory postulates that power is related to the dependence and
interdependence of actors (Blau, 1964; Homans 1961; Emerson, 1962; Thibaut & Kelley,
1959). Power and powerlessness are relationally based on the interactions between one or
more individuals (Hodson et al., 2006). According to Thibaut and Kelley, the
contingency of an individual’s behavioral performance on the actions and responses of
another individual creates a dynamic of power dependency between the individuals or
actors. The direction of the dependency is based on which actor is more dependent; the
individual who is less dependent is deemed to have power over the more dependent
individual (Molm, 1990; Pfeffer, 1981).
Two levels of power have been found to influence the frequency and distribution
of exchange outcomes (Molm, 1990). The structure of power in exchange networks is
based on the relations of dependence of actors. Power imbalance represents the net
difference between the power dependencies of the actors. Average power in the relation
is measured using the average of the actor dyad power dependencies (Molm). The
strategic use of structural power by actors allows for the manipulation of the outcomes of
exchange. In making rewards and punishments contingent on other factors such as
behavior and perceptions of power, power strategies can be cultivated and exercised as a
means of controlling the interaction of the social exchange (Blau, 1964; Emerson, 1962;
Molm). The outcomes of power are measured behaviorally over time as a means of
predicting relations among structure, action, and outcomes (Homans, 1961; Molm).
21
Theories Used to Explain Workplace Bullying
Bullying has been found to be a serious source of stress in the workplace (Lutgen-
Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007; Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007). Stress theory
postulates that the aggressor is positively reinforced by eliciting a desired response in the
target, making aggressive behavior more probable of being repeated in the future (Selye,
1956). The stressor must be viewed as threatening by the individual, and in spite of of
whether the threat is positive or negative, the stimulus must be perceived as influencing
the welfare of the individual. Consequently, the individual’s ability to adapt will diminish
completely under this structure (Selye). Critical components of the stress model address
the type and intensity of a stimulus, the individual's perception of the stimulus, and the
duration of the stimulus that depletes the capacity to cope (Selye). The degree to which
the general adaptation syndrome is implemented and the amount of time during which it
is operational depends on the intensity and type of stress experienced. Selye posited that
continued intense stimulation from stress depletes the organism's ability to respond to
stress effectively.
According to social learning theory (Bandura, 1973), bullying can be seen as a
form of continual aggression and be understood as a learned set of behavior, primarily
stimulated by external sources or modeling (Bandura, 1977a). The aggressor is positively
reinforced by eliciting desired a response in the target, making the behavior more likely
to be repeated in the future. A cycle of violence is applicable in situations in which
aggressive and submissive personality traits are observed as relatively stable over time
(Tehrani, 2001). Low self-esteem, a sense of disempowerment, and higher than normal
22
anxiety levels are among personality traits frequently identified among targets of
bullying.
As the conflict during social interaction progresses, targets will increasingly
attribute blame to the opponent while simultaneously attributing less responsibility for
events to themselves (Kelly, 1972). Targets of bullying tend to attribute blame to external
sources or to the work environment, as well as to opponents, as opposed to blaming
themselves. Outcomes of individual negotiations will decide how a person feels and acts.
In the theoretical construction of attribution and the general principles of attribution,
individuals tend to project positive experiences towards themselves, while behavior or
acts that may be considered negative are projected on to others (Kelly). The role of
individual perception uses social representations as an interpretative framework that may
account for an event phenomenon. Outcomes of individual negotiations will decide how a
person feels and subsequently acts.
Bullying, when viewed in the context of conflict theory, is tied to the conflict
escalation process. The response of the target is viewed as integral with processes and
outcomes. People can be trained to recognize and avoid escalating behavior instead of
avoiding the problem by using deconstructive and maladaptive conflict-solving strategies
(Lutgen-Sandvik et al, 2007; Tehrani, 2001; Zapf & Gross, 2001). Organizational chaos
and relational power theory posits that personality attributes of bullies, the interplay of
relational powerlessness and organizational chaos are found to be related to the
perpetuation of workplace bullying (Hodson et al., 2006: Zapf & Gross). Workplaces that
foster an organizational culture filled with chaos and conflict may perpetuate relational
powerlessness. The social antecedents of bullying have mainly focused on the role of the
23
organizational norm and the relationship between the bullying and socialization processes
at work. Social interaction theory (Simmel, 1950) addresses the interaction mechanisms
of both the dyad and triad, and permits relationships of the people involved in bullying to
be better understood.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined for the purpose of this dissertation. The
definitions will help facilitate a common understanding among readers.
Bullying intensity and frequency. Cumulative intensity score will be derived by
summing the total number of reported negative acts (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007).
Frequency scores will be calculated by adding the total number of negative acts occurring
on a daily or weekly basis (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.).
Bullying forms. Two factors will be used to describe forms of workplace bullying
(Einarsen & Hoel, 2001). Personal bullying consists of 12 items from the NAQ-R
describing exposure to negative acts such as passing rumors, making offensive
comments, teasing excessively and making constant criticism (Einarsen & Hoel).
Work-related bullying consists of eight items from the NAQ-R that measure exposure to
negative acts such as unreasonable turnaround times for work, impossible workloads,
excessive oversight, and experience of withholding of vital information (Einarsen &
Hoel).
Horizontal workplace bullying. Horizontal workplace bullying takes place
between employees who are of the same rank in the same occupation (Woelfle &
McCaffrey, 2007; Heames & Harvey, 2006; Turney, 2003).

24
Job type. To distinguish between the many different roles assumed by IT
professionals, the job types were broken into six categories as done in a previous study by
Turner and Baroudi (1986) with a category of executive added. The seven job types are
defined as follows based on the work of Turner and Baroudi (1986, p. 7-8):
1. Application development: programmers and analysts performing maintenance and
developing new application systems.
2. Liaison and coordination: database administration, network administration, data
administrator, and end-user coordinator.
3. Systems programming: programmer who also performs system maintenance,
configuration and modification, and installation and maintenance of packaged
software.
4. Technical consultants: handles documentation, manual procedures, training other
experts whose expertise is necessary for the development of application systems.
5. Technical management: project leader or department head.
6. Operations support: maintains tape and disk libraries, user information services,
console operation.
7. Executive: chief information officer (CIO) or chief technical officer (CTO).
Mobbing. This term was initially used by Leymann (1990) and represents the
negative behaviors that are currently associated with and known as workplace bullying
(Namie, 2007; Yildirim et al., 2007).
Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ-R). The NAQ-R is a tool for measuring
perceived exposure to bullying and victimization at the workplace (Einarsen, Raknes,
Matthiesen, & Hellesøy, 1994). The questionnaire consists of 22 items written in

25
behavioral terms, but with no reference to the term bullying. Researchers have
established high internal consistency for this instrument, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging
from .81 to .92 (Einarsen et al.).
Professional power and power profession. The study of the professions focuses
on the structures of power that are attributed and related to individuals based on the status
and power associated within a profession (Wrong, 2004). Vertical workplace bullying has
been found to take place in power relationships of a professional context (Turney, 2003;
Peel, 2001).
Psychological empowerment. This term is defined using Thomas and Velthouse’s
model consisting of four dimensions of cognition: (a) meaning, (b), competence, (c) self-
determination, and (d) impact (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). The four cognitions have
been found to be associated with an active orientation to a work role. Empowerment has
been conceptualized using Bandura’s (1989) idea that empowerment is about the
fluctuating perceptions of people about themselves in relation to the work environment.
Risk groups. Women, people of non-white ethnicities, and individuals who are
greater than 35 years of age are considered at risk for workplace bullying (Einarsen, S.,
Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.)., 2003).
Social power. This term is defined as the ability to exert interpersonal influence
(Molm, 1990; Heames & Harvey, 2006; Homans, 1961).
Witnessed bullying. This term is used to describe a respondent who upon being
provided the operational definition of workplace bullying answers “yes” to the question
that asks if the respondent has witnessed one or more persons being targeted by a bully
while working during the past six months (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007).
26
Workplace bullying. Since research on workplace aggression started in the 1970s,
the definition of workplace bullying has been refined several times. Research in
workplace bullying in the United States places the phenomenon into a hierarchical
framework. The phenomenon is conceptualized as presented by Lutgen-Sandvik et al.,
(2007), using a hierarchy and associated definitions of superordinate, intermediate, and
subordinate types of negative communication and conduct (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007,
p. 840). The superordinate group of behaviors is generalized to include negative
workplace behaviors and interactions including bullying. The specific types of behaviors
are aggression, counterproductive acts, injustices, antisocial tendencies, deviance, and
violence. The intermediate forms of workplace abuse are bullying, emotional abuse,
harassment, and mistreatment (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007, p. 841). Sexual or ethnic
harassment and discrimination based on age or disability are included. Subordinate
behaviors include victimization, incivility, and verbal aggressiveness (Lutgen-Sandvik et
al.).
Workplace bullying is operationally-defined in extant research as an intermediate
phenomenon occurring when an individual experiences “at least two or more negative
acts, weekly or more often, for six or more months in situations where targets find it
difficult to defend against and stop the abuse” (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007, p. 844). The
negative acts are operationally-defined and listed as 22 separate behaviors on the revised
version of the NAQ-R; none of the NAQ-R items refer to “bullying” specifically. The
majority of definitions in extant research include the characteristic of power imbalance
between perpetrator and target; the target feels disempowered and therefore unable to
bring to an end to or avoid abuse (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.; Namie, 2007). This study
27
operationally defines workplace bullying as occurring when an individual experiences
one or more negative acts, weekly or more often, for a duration of six months.
Vertical or hierarchical workplace bullying. Vertical bullying involves a power
disparity within a profession based on interpersonal hierarchy (Heames & Harvey, 2006;
Turney, 2003; Peel, 2001).
Assumptions
An assumption is made that the NAQ-R serves as an accurate measure of the
workplace bullying construct (Einarsen et al., 1994) and the psychological empowerment
instrument (Spreitzer, 1995) serves as an accurate measure of psychological
empowerment based on the norms that have been established in extant research. To
prevent the possibility of introducing bias by attracting employees who have been
subjected to bullying, all forms of communication and verbiage on the website and
invitation to participate in the study referred to the project as The IT Workplace Survey
and asked respondents to “Tell us about your experiences in the workplace.” All efforts
were made to ensure participants of confidentiality to encourage participants to respond
to the survey questionnaire. The assumption was made that the participants in this study
were representative of the study population.
Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations
One purpose of this quantitative correlational survey investigation was to examine
the differences between male and female IT professionals working in different job types
or positions in the public and private work sectors in the United States. This study also
looked at self-reported exposure to different forms of workplace bullying as target or
witness as well as perceptions of psychological empowerment based on the four cognitive

28
dimensions of competence, impact, meaning, and self-determination (Thomas &
Velthouse, 1990). The focus of this study was limited to the constructs of workplace
bullying and psychological empowerment as defined in the study and specific to the IT
workplace environment in the public and private work sectors.
During the answering of the questionnaire, the assumption was made that
participants responded to the NAQ-R and the Psychological Empowerment Instrument
honestly and accurately. Questions presented from the NAQ-R (Einarsen, Raknes,
Matthiesen & Hellesøy, 1994) have been found to possess an acceptable level of
construct validity for workplace bullying and questions presented from The
Psychological Empowerment Instrument (Spreitzer, 1995) have been found to possess an
acceptable level of construct validity for psychological empowerment. Validity of this
study is also limited to the reliability of the instruments used.
This study was confined to surveying the prevalence and forms of workplace
bullying and psychological empowerment among IT professionals working in the United
States and investigated the extent to which a relationship exists between workplace
bullying and psychological empowerment. The sample was taken from the AITP
membership database and focused specifically on IT professionals working in the United
States. An inadequate number of participants could significantly reduce the validity of the
study. Since this study focused on the IT work environment specifically and a
convenience sample was utilized, the ability to generalize the results to work
environments other than IT is limited (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2008). This study focused on
the variables of gender, job type, and work sector (public or private), workplace bullying,
and psychological empowerment.

29
The Likert-type instrument has known limitations (McMillan & Schumacher,
2001); the different responses allow each respondent to judge frequency slightly
differently. Perception of being bullied and interpretation of frequency could lead to
imprecise responses when using a scale that varies from 1 (never) to 5 (daily).
Perceptions of psychological empowerment and the interpretation of frequency could also
lead to imprecise responses when using a scale that varies from 1 (very strongly disagree)
to 7 (very strongly agree). All efforts were made to prevent imprecise responses based on
the presentation of the Likert scale.
Summary
Workplace bullying is a worldwide phenomenon. Extant research of workplace
bullying in the United States differs in cohesiveness and context from that outside the
United States due to cultural differences (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007).
Workplace bullying has been found to influence the health, well-being, and economic
welfare of individuals and families as well as the climate and business interests of
organizations (Lutgen-Sandvik; Namie; Workplace Bullying Institute, 2008). The
purpose of this quantitative, descriptive, explanatory, correlational research study was to
extend current research on workplace bullying. This investigative process may provide
data to leaders and management that will provide further insight into the phenomenon of
workplace bullying.
Chapter 2 presents a discussion of the relevant extant literature related to the
antecedents, prevalence, perception, degree and influence of workplace bullying,
negative workplace environment factors among IT professionals, and ways of explaining
workplace bullying by reviewing the “enabling, motivating, and precipitating structures

30
and processes” in the workplace environment (Salin, 2003b, p. 1217). The literature
traces the international history of the phenomenon of workplace bullying (originally
termed workplace mobbing), the evolution of the operational definition of workplace
bullying as a construct, and the history behind the constructs of power and empowerment.
31
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The prevalence of workplace bullying in certain work sectors and related negative
work outcomes has been the topic of thorough investigation in Scandinavia and other
European countries, but there is a limited amount of research that has been conducted on
various work sectors in the United States (Namie, 2007). Much of the research that has
been conducted on workplace bullying has occurred in European and Nordic countries
(Salin), but research in the United States is gradually increasing (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.;
McKay et al.). Research outside of the United States has demonstrated that workplace
bullying is prevalent in many countries (Salin). According to Lutgen-Sandvik, U.S.
researchers have focused on many negative acts at work, but bullying as contextualized
by the international studies has not been thoroughly investigated. All of the literature has
found that workplace bullying has a negative influence on the health, well-being, and
economic welfare of individuals, families as well as the climate and business interests of
organizations.
Organizations are increasingly starting to recognize the costs associated with
bullying, stress, burnout, and depression (McDonald & Dear, 2008), which are related to
absenteeism, turnover, and decreased productivity and warrant further investigation
(Tracy, 2006; Broome, 2008). Since the events of September 11, 2001, the U.S.
Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) have increased law
enforcement and research efforts regarding the escalation of psychological and physical
workplace violence (U.S. Department of Justice, 2004).
Reporting of workplace bullying in the United States is becoming more prevalent,
and individuals, families, businesses, and the economy are all influenced in a negative
manner and in various ways (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007;
32
McKay et al., 2008; Namie, 2007; Salin, 2008). In the health sector and academic work
environments, violence, harassment, and bullying has been prevalent for some time;
however the concern about this phenomenon is growing in Australia, Canada, United
Kingdom and in the United States (Broome, 2008; Hinchberger, 2009). The World
Health Organization, the International Council of Nurses, and Public Services
International recognized the deleterious impact of workplace violence and in 2002,
formed a collaborative research group to further investigate the problem. After
conducting numerous studies, the group determined that there were global implications of
violence in the healthcare sector spreading across boundaries of ethnicity, race, religion,
and socioeconomic status (Hinchberger, 2009). Bullying occurrences in global
organizations are attributed to increased diversity, exposure to unfamiliar work
environments, dispersion of workers at different global locations, and overall lack of
managerial experience in dealing with personnel issues on a global scale (Harvey et al.,
2007).
In the current review of the literature, no research was found that investigated the
phenomenon of workplace bullying in the IT work environment. The scope of this
literature review was limited to the specific dissertation topic: IT professionals’
perceptions of workplace bullying and the relationship to perceived psychological
empowerment. Table 1 details the specific terms used to search for the dissertation topic.
Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature that contextualized and clarified the research
problem, research questions, and the stated hypotheses (including the independent and
the dependent variables). The goal of the literature review is to summarize the extant
knowledge concerning the relationship between the independent and dependent variables,
33
and to discuss the implications of research not having been conducted in specific areas
related to the topic of investigation (Creswell, 2005). A total number of 194 references
were used in this study.
Table 1.
Summary of Literature Review Themes
Effects of workplace
Workplace bullying Empowerment
bullying and empowerment
topics topics
topics
History History Leadership
Definitions Self-efficacy Workplace outcomes
Negative outcomes Definitions Social exchange
Individual level Social-structural Social interaction
Dyadic level Psychological Innovation
Group level Social power Disempowerment
Organizational level Social exchange Gender
Risk sectors Power disparity Organizational culture
Workplace Empowerment
aggression
Prevalence Disempowerment
Mobbing Bases of power
Targets, perpetrators Power relations
Antecedents Power professions
Legislature
34
The research questions were established to address some of the limitations that
exist in the previous studies conducted on workplace bullying. The extent of the
relationship between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work
environment is not known. The prevalence and forms of workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment have not been examined
previously. Differences of gender, job type, and work sector (public or private) in IT
professionals related to workplace bullying and psychological empowerment have not
been a significant focal area in the extant research.
The research study will be based on the following research questions:
type?
private sector?
Documentation
The examination of literature for this chapter involved an extensive literary search
35
of the University of Phoenix’s library, numerous books and journals, reports from federal
agencies, organizations, and (a) several Internet research databases, such as EBSCOhost,
ProQuest, Google Scholar, and Questia; (b) germinal texts; (c) research studies. The
literature search used keywords, such as workplace bullying, mobbing and workplace
violence, bases of social power, psychological empowerment, social exchange theory,
social interaction, power relations, structural power, power strategies, and IT work
environment. Various theoretical frameworks and related theoretical constructs were
included in the extensive review of the literature. The search is summarized in Appendix
H, including the databases queried and related search terms.
Workplace Bullying
Workplace Bullying Defined
According to Quine (1999), three components are associated with the definition of
workplace bullying: (a) the effects on the target, not the intention of the bully; (b) the
negative influence on the target; and (c) the repetition of the negative behavior associated
with workplace bullying. There are numerous definitions that have been proposed for
workplace bullying (Agervold, 2007; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Salin, 2008). Because
the construct of bullying involves perception that is known to have subjective
components, an individual may or may not perceive himself as bullied. The need to
investigate the phenomena of workplace bullying has caused researchers to adopt a
specific operational definition framed using a behavioral model (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.,
2007; Salin, 2008).
Bullying was described by Brodsky (1976) as occurring when repeated and
unrelenting attempts are made by a person in the workplace to torment, wear down,
36
frustrate, or elicit a reaction from another person in the workplace and, during the
process, provokes, pressures, instills fear, intimidates, or discomforts that person.
Repetitious exposure of a target to negative, enduring acts carried out by coworkers,
superiors or subordinates has been presented as the primary component defining
workplace bullying in addition to the target’s inability to defend him/herself (Namie,
2007). A power imbalance occurs when one individual involved in an interaction with
one or more individuals lacks the strength to defend himself. Specifically, Einarsen et al.
(2003) stated that workplace bullying is:
Harassing, offending, socially excluding someone or negatively affecting
someone’s work tasks. In order for the label bullying (or mobbing) to be applied
to a particular activity, interaction or process it has to occur repeatedly and
regularly (e.g., weekly) and over a period of time (e.g., about six months).
Bullying is an escalating process in the course of which the person confronted
ends up in an in an inferior position and becomes the target of systematic negative
social acts. A conflict cannot be called bullying if the incident is an isolated event
or if two parties of approximately equal ‘strength’ are in conflict. (p. 15)
Most research characterizes bullying as repetitious negative acts directed at an
individual (Einarsen, 2003). In most cases, an isolated incident of negative behavior acted
out against a person is not considered to meet the classification for bullying. According to
Einarsen and Skogstad (1996), negative behaviors that have taken place in the last six
months either sporadically or weekly can be considered bullying. Leymann (1990)
suggested that a frequency criterion be established of one incident a week over a period
of at least 6 months. Bullying involves frequent and prolonged exposure to negative acts
37
that occur as an escalating process (Notelaers, Einarsen, De Witte, & Vermunt, 2006).
Work-related conflict has been found to gradually render the target powerless and unable
to cope with the situation. The specific number of negative acts as reported by the target
(intensity) builds to a level in which the target of the bullying becomes a victim of the
negative behavior (Notelaers et al.).
An imbalance of power is one of the primary characteristics of bullying (Salin;
Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007). Individuals who feel inferior or incapable of defending
themselves during interaction with another become victim to the power dyad (Peel, 2001;
Azfa, 2005; Heames & Harvey, 2006). One of the critical components of measuring
bullying includes the perception on the part of the target and to what extent that person
feels disempowered (Hodson et al., 2006). The findings of numerous studies provide
support for the phenomenon that women experience a reduction in bargaining power in
the workplace in comparison to men (Berdahl, 2007; Lutgen-Sandvik, 2007; Vickers,
2007; McDonald & Dear, 2008). Researchers have suggested that gaining a better
understanding of power structures and power imbalances in organizations will facilitate
awareness that will lead towards the creation organizational policies and practices
designed to address organizational power differences (Berdahl; Lutgen-Sandvik; Vickers;
Salin, 2008).
According to Einarsen et al. (2003), victims of bullying are often exposed to a
wide range of direct and indirect behaviors that sometimes lead to physical or
psychological violence. This exposure has been found to induce shame and confusion
from the perspective of the target (McDonald & Dear, 2008; McKay et al., 2007).
Workplace bullying is a type of interpersonal aggression at work that does not involve
38
simple incivility, but possesses the more extensive features of frequency, intensity,
duration and power disparity (Afza, 2005; Rayner & Keashly, 2005). According to Salin
(2008), bullying at work involves “repeated and persistent negative actions towards one
or more individual(s), which involves a perceived power imbalance and create a hostile
work environment.” (p. 1214). The repetitive exposure to acts of bullying is continuously
differentiated in the literature from single incidences of exposure that occur without
frequency or duration over time (Einarsen & Hoel, 2001; Leymann, 1990; Lutgen-
Sandvik et al., 2007; Rayner et al., Salin, 2001, 2008).
Researchers suggest in extant literature that bullying behavior occurs in series or
gradations. Frequency, intensity, and duration of the bullying are referred to as the degree
of bullying exposure (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Rafferty, 2007). Bullying degree is
measured as an aggregated score of the intensity, frequency, and duration of negative acts
that the target has been exposed to. The degree of bullying has been linked to the
negative outcomes experienced by targets. According to Keashly and Neuman (2005),
workers in the United States who reported being exposed to bullying and aggression on
an ongoing basis were found to experience more harm as a result.
Historical Overview of Workplace Bullying
Researchers began investigating workplace bullying in the late 1980s in Nordic
countries and eventually migrated efforts to Europe in the mid-1990s (Leymann, 1990).
Much the research occurred as a result of investigations into bullying behavior in the
schoolyard (Leymann). The original term used by Leymann to describe bullying was
mobbing, and after studying schoolyard bullying with children. Upon witnessing similar
behaviors in adults, he expanded his focus to include workplace bullying. A large portion
39
of the research conducted in Scandinavia investigated the relationship between bullying
and work environment quality (Einarsen et al., 1994).
In cases where bullying was prevalent in the workplace, a correlation was made to
a laissez-faire leadership style, role ambiguity and conflict, and a lack of control over
work (Skogstad, Einarsen et al., 2007). Studies of mobbing and workplace harassment
were also conducted in Finland (Bjorkvist et al., 1994). Norwegian and Finnish research
endeavors in workplace bullying and a British journalist named Andrea Adams increased
awareness into the phenomenon of bullying through television broadcasts (Adams &
Crawford, 1992). In the United States, Brodsky’s (1976) The Harassed Worker was
published in as a compilation of research on workplace harassment, and today the work is
considered to be germane to the study of workplace bullying.
Numerous theoretical frameworks have been used to provide an understanding of
the phenomenon of workplace bullying (Tehrani, 2001). Constructs described in the
behavioral, psychological, and sociological literature have provided foundational
knowledge within the extant research in the related inquiry areas of aggression, bullying,
mobbing, social interaction, social structure, power, and control. Psychological
empowerment and related management practices has been the subject of increasing
attention in the last two decades. Both management and psychology literature areas have
focused on the underlying relational and motivational constructs related to psychological
empowerment (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). According to McLelland (1975), managerial
and organizational effectiveness can be improved through the psychological
empowerment of subordinates. Psychological empowerment practices have been found to

40
be fundamental to the group development and maintenance process (Beckhard, 1969;
Neilsen, 1986; Azfa, 2005; Bhatnagar, 2005).
Research conducted in the area of workplace bullying uses the six major
theoretical areas of (a) stress, (b) social learning, (c) attribution, (d) conflict, (e)
organizational chaos, and (f) relational power. Although numerous theoretical
frameworks have been utilized in extant research to provide an understanding for
workplace bullying, the primary framework that was used in this research study was
social exchange theory. One purpose of this quantitative correlational study was to
examine the perceptions of workplace bullying exposure reported by a sample of IT
professionals and the degree to which that perception of workplace bullying influenced
perception of psychological empowerment. Extant literature suggests that social
exchange theory would provide a relevant theoretical framework best suited for the
objective of this research study.
Research findings from outside of the United States have shown that workplace
bullying is a common problem in many countries (Zapf & Einarsen, 2003). According to
Lutgen-Sandvik et al. (2007), U.S. researchers have focused on many negative acts at
work, but bullying as contextualized by the international studies has not been thoroughly
investigated. In the overall literature involving the United States, workplace bullying has
been found to influence the health, well-being, and economic welfare of individuals,
families as well as the climate and business interests of organizations (Lutgen-Sandvik et
al.; Namie, 2007).
Bullying is considered a serious source of occupational stress in the workplace
(Einarsen & Hoel, 2001). Stress theorists postulate that the aggressor in a dyadic
41
interaction is positively reinforced by eliciting a desired response in the target, making
the behavior more likely to be repeated in the future (Selye, 1976). The stressor must be
perceived as a threat by the individual, and regardless of whether the threat is positive or
negative, the stimulus must be perceived as influencing the welfare of the individual, and
the individual’s ability to adapt has diminished completely. Critical components of the
stress model address the type and intensity of a stimulus, the individual's perception of
the stimulus, and the duration of the stimulus that depletes the capacity to cope
(Björkqvist, 2001). The degree to which the general adaptation syndrome is implemented
and the amount of time during which it is operational depend on the intensity and type of
stress experienced. When present, social defeat is a stressor that has been found to
increase the likelihood that the individual will be bullied. Selye posited that continued
intense stimulation from stress depletes the organism's ability to respond to stress at all,
or to respond effectively (1956).
According to social learning theory (Bandura, 1973), bullying can be
conceptualized as a form of continual aggression, and be understood as a learned set of
behaviors, primarily stimulated by external sources or modeling (Bandura, 1977). The
aggressor is positively reinforced by eliciting desired response in target, making the
behavior more likely to be repeated in the future. A cycle of violence occurs because
personality traits such as aggression and submissiveness can, when established, be
considered to be relatively stable over time (Tehrani, 2001). Low self-esteem and higher
than normal anxiety levels are among personality traits frequently identified with targets.
Social cognition involves the expectations of personal efficacy as a coping
mechanism for the individual when presented with an aversive experience (Bandura,
42
1977). Cognitive processing is posited as having a role in the acquisition and
reinforcement of new behavior patterns. Based on perceived efficacy in a social situation,
an individual will engage in specific behavior due to expectations of outcome. Perceived
efficacy may serve as an explanation as to why targets of bullying feel helpless and lack
motivation to seek help when continuously confronted with bullying behavior. Based on
previous attempts to cope with the bully, future patterns of behavior on the part of the
bully and the target are perceived by the target based on experiences of success or failure
at dealing with the problem.
As the conflict during social interaction progresses, targets will increasingly
attribute blame to the opponent while simultaneously attributing less responsibility for
events to themselves (Kelly, 1972). Outcomes of individual negotiations will influence
how a person feels and acts. In the theoretical construction of attribution (Kelly) and the
general principles of attribution, individuals tend to project positive experiences towards
themselves, while behavior or acts that may be considered negative are projected onto
others. Targets of bullying tend to attribute blame to external sources or to the work
environment, as well as to opponents, as opposed to blaming themselves. The role of
individual perception uses social representations as an interpretative framework that may
account for an event occurrence.
Bullying, when viewed in the context of conflict theory, is tied to the conflict
escalation process; the response of the target is viewed as integral with processes and
outcomes. People can be trained to recognize and avoid escalating behavior, rather than
avoiding the problem by using deconstructive and maladaptive conflict-solving strategies
(Tehrani, 2001; Zapf & Gross, 2001). Organizational chaos and relational power theory
43
posits that personality attributes of bullies, the interplay of relational powerlessness, and
organizational chaos are found to be related to the perpetuation of workplace bullying
(Zapf & Gross).
Giddens (1984), a British social science researcher, presented the theory of
structuration as a means of studying social change or how society evolves over time.
Giddens’ theory of structuration was presented by Bocault (2001) as a means of
explaining workplace bullying, the social processes associated with individuals, and the
influence on the evolution of societal structure. The primary focus of his theory was the
double hermeneutic process, in which an individual is able to influence societal structure
by using reflection on the day’s events as a decision-making and interpretive tool to
engage in current practices or change current practices.
In a study presented by Turner (1991), a model based on Giddens’ structuration
theory was presented that used the 11 “sensitizing concepts” of the theory as a framework
for explaining how social problems, such as workplace bullying, can be effectively
understood and managed in the workplace. The concepts are (a) Needs for ontological
security, (b) Unconscious motives, (c) Practical consciousness, (d) Discursive
consciousness, (e) Social systems of interaction, (f) Regionalisation/routinisation (g)
Structural properties/institutions, (h) Structural sets, (i) Structural principles, (j) Rules
and resources, and (k) Structure.
The essence of Giddens’ structuration theory is that an individual can reflect on
his/her workplace schema and bring about changes in behavior based on the processing
of additional knowledge and insight into how that behavior influences organizational
processes and structure (Bocault, 2001). The double hermeneutic principle is described
44
by Bocault as being part of a process in which people cause positive changes to occur
based on a new awareness that is derived from recently acquired knowledge and
understanding that has influenced the personal world view (Bocault). This double
hermeneutic process and resulting reflexive thought process has implications for
practitioners in management of workplace bullying on an individual and organizational
level. The knowledge acquired from increased awareness, training, and workshops may
influence social and structural change and bring about positive behavioral changes that
facilitate the management of workplace bullying from an intervention and prevention
perspective.
According to Moscovici (1963), groups of individuals’ process social interactions
using a framework of common understanding called social representation. Systems of
values, ideas, and practices of the group serve to structure the orientation of individuals to
the surrounding environment in order to flourish in that environment while enabling
communication amongst members of the group using a code of social exchange based on
established individual and group history (Moscovici). An underlying goal or purpose is
driven by the underlying human need to clarify the things that tend to be confusing.
The cognitive component of social representations pertains to the active role and
the individual or group assumptions during the construction of reality, and the social
component involves the collective production of social representations during social
interactions (Moscovici, 1963). Development of social representations has been shown to
serve as a beneficial process in enabling a group of aggressive males to both understand
and manage their propensity for aggression (Levin-Rozalis, Bar-on, & Hartof, 2003).
This finding has implications for therapeutic interventions in the group setting and
45
through the development of social presentations, which may offer insight into workplace
bullying.
Researchers of the social antecedents of bullying have mainly focused on the role
of the organizational norm and the relationship between the bullying and socialization
processes at work. The application of social interaction theory (Simmel, 1950) addresses
the interaction mechanisms of both the dyad and triad and permits relationships of the
people involved in bullying to be better understood. Relationships based on
superordination and subordination, are the foundations of social life (Simmel). In a
proper sociological context, superordination and subordination should involve reciprocal
effectiveness, in which the subordinate is not coerced into his position.
Social Exchange Theory
Social exchange theory was posited as a means of understanding the process of
negotiated exchange between individuals from a social psychological and sociological
perceptive (Emerson, 1962). All relationships and interactions between individuals are
considered to be resulting in a subjective cost-benefit analysis and the comparison of
alternatives. Although the theory is founded in the principles of economics, psychology,
and sociology, the framework involves the exchange of resources in the form of
interaction between dyads or actors engaged in a social process. Social exchange theory
postulates that power is related to the dependence and interdependence of actors (Blau,
1964; Emerson, 1962; Thibaut & Kelley, 1959). According to Thibaut and Kelley, the
contingency of an individual’s behavioral performance on the actions and responses of
another individual creates a dynamic of power dependency between the individuals or
actors. The direction of the dependency is based on which actor is more dependent; the
46
individual who is less dependent is deemed to have power over the more dependent
individual (Pfeffer, 1982).
According to Homans (1961),
“human behavior is an exchange system of rewards between actors and focuses on
how interaction patterns are formed by power relationships between individuals, and
the desire to achieve balance or mutual benefit in exchange relations” (p. 31).
The general assumption of exchange theory is that individuals create and maintain
social relationships on the basis of expectations that the relationship will benefit all
individuals involved in the relationship. Human behavior can be described using five
equations or propositions (Homans, 1961):
1. Success Proposition. Within the actions taken by an individual, the more an action
is rewarded or positively reinforced, the higher the likelihood the person will
repeat that action.
2. Stimulus Proposition. If certain stimuli were present in the past when an
individual’s actions were rewarded, then the more similar the present stimuli are
to the past stimuli, the higher the likelihood the person will repeat the action(s) or
similar action(s).
3. Value Proposition. The more positive or negative value the result of an
individual’s action is to an individual, the higher the likelihood the person will
repeat that action.
4. Aggression/Approval Proposition. If an individual’s actions do not receive a
reward as expected by the individual or if the individual is negatively reinforced
for his actions, the individual will be more likely to act aggressively. If an
47
unexpected reward occurs, or expected negative reinforcement does not occur, the
individual will be motivated to perform approved behaviors.
5. Rationality Proposition. When an individual is presented with the choice of
performing alternative actions, the individual will choose the action for which the
value perceived (v) for the result of that action multiplied by the probability (P) of
obtaining the result is greater.
Power and Social Exchange
Social scientists view power using three different conceptualizations: (a) as a
structured potential (Emerson, 1962), (b) a process of behavior or tactical influence
(Rubin & Brown, 1975), and (c) as the successful outcome of influence (Dahl, 1957).
According to extant literature in the areas of power and exchange, the structure and
action of exchange is linked to the outcome of power in different ways. The power
structure may influence the exchange outcome directly with no influence from the
strategies used for interaction (Emerson) or the interaction strategies may influence
exchange outcomes independently of structural power. Power may also influence
exchange outcomes indirectly by the resulting effect on action (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959).
Most theorists posit that the construct of social exchange possesses certain
characteristics within a general framework (Cook & Emerson, 1978). Exchange behavior
is considered to be behavior based on choice in which the actor is provided a set of
opportunities of different alternatives to choose from for exchange relations within the
overall structure of exchange. Actors choose exchange partners based on the rewards and
cost that choices have produced in past exchanges or as expected in the future. Actors
engage or initiate the exchange without formal negotiations and without consideration of
48
whether, when and to what degree, the other actors in the exchange will participate.
Future exchange is based on the perceived return on previous exchange outcomes that
have occurred over time (Cook & Emerson).
Power is differentiated by Emerson as (a) a structural attribute of exchange
relations or networks and (b) power use as a behavioral attribute of actors (Emerson,
1962). The relations of dependence among actors in exchange networks and the potential
power created are referred to in the literature as structural power (Emerson). In the social
exchange, the power of one actor, A, over another actor, B, is equal to B’s dependence on
A. There are two dimensions of structural power in the A-B relation that come from the
power and dependencies of the individual actors: power imbalance and average power.
Power imbalance is the difference between the two actors’ power dependencies. Power
advantages occur when one actor is less dependent on the other; the more asymmetry in
power of the social exchange, the greater the imbalance that is present (Emerson).
Average power is viewed as the average of the two actors’ power/dependencies.
Behavioral exchange is influenced by the variations in the strength of the power that is
present. The base of structural power is another dimension that has been considered in the
literature within the same theoretical framework. An actor’s control over rewards and
punishments for the other actor consists of a range of consequential outcomes, from
positive to negative, that are delivered during the social interaction (Emerson).
Bases of Social Power
Social power has been generally defined in the literature as the ability to influence
other people. French and Raven (1959) distinguished between six types of power
demonstrated by people engaged in social interaction. As defined by French and Raven,

49
the six types of social power are: (a) reward, (b) coercive, (c) referent, (d) legitimate, (f)
expert, and (g) informational.
Reward power reflects the capacity of an individual to positively reinforce
desirable behavior (French & Raven, 1959). Conversely, coercive power is the ability or
potential to provide negative reinforcement or punitive measures for undesirable
behavior. Reward and coercive power are viewed as opposites. A primary feature for
both reward and punishment is that both are controlled by the "superior" individual and
are enacted upon subordinates based upon relationships that are behaviorally misaligned.
The "inferior" individual who is able to control the results of [his/her] actions makes the
role of the superior unnecessary and the result is considered either a success or failure
overall.
Referent power involves the allocation of worth or respect to an individual based
on the possession of personal attributes with which others deem as virtuous. By contrast,
legitimate power is based upon authority associated with position in an organizational
structure. Referent power is person-specific, while legitimate power is depersonalized.
Referent power does not imply that an action by the "superior" individual has occurred to
warrant the reverence; the referring individual voluntarily associates him or herself to the
referent person (French & Raven, 1959).
Expert power is a type of referent power that results from the possession of
specialized expertise but informational power is a form of legitimate power that is based
on one’s ability to make information accurate and readily available to others. Expert
power comes from substantive net differences in the knowledge base of two individuals
on specific subjects and is restricted to expertise, making expert power easier to identify
50
than referent power due to specificity. Expertise would most likely exist as a type of
referent power in the information age (French & Raven, 1959).
Structural Sources of Intra-Organizational Power
According to Hawley (1950), “Every social act is an exercise of power; every
social relationship is a power equation; and every social group or system is an
organization of power” (p. 422). On that basis, many social scientists seek to improve the
overall understanding of power as a concept by focusing on specific dimensions of power
as found in social and organizational contexts. The conceptualization of power by Weber
(1947) was largely focused on the hierarchical structure of the organization. Power is
commonly analyzed in the context of dependence relationships (Emerson, 1962). Power
distance depicts how people who possess different levels of power interact with one
another (Gupta & Sharma, 2008; Azfa, 2005; Bhatnagar, 2005; Vega & Comer, 2005).
The numerous interpretations of power in the context of the organization have
caused the literature to become disorganized. In an effort to reassemble the literature into
more cohesive and logical groups, three sources of power (hierarchical authority,
resource control, network centrality) have been proposed (Astley & Sachdeva, 1984). In
hierarchical authority, power is assumed based on the position held by the individual in
the organization. Power is attributed to the position by subordinates who comply with
superiors because of the rights and privileges that are conveyed to the position. The
superior is placed in a position of power, one that can expect obedience. Formal
prerogative is sanctioned by the organization, allowing the subordinate to depend on the
superior for needs to be met (Astley & Sachdeva).

51
Resource control is derived from the idea that resources can be withheld or
allocated through the control possessed by a designated entity (Yuchtman & Seashore,
1967). This dependence relationship is one of the underlying bases of social exchange
theory, in which the power assumed by actors is said to be asymmetric. Organizations are
deemed to be open social systems in which resources are allocated to critical processes
primarily, and other processes secondarily (Astley & Sachdeva, 1984). The ability to
withhold or ultimately control resources that are scarce creates a power dynamic between
actors within an organization.
Organizations are typically divided and differentiated by horizontal (division or
department) and vertical (hierarchical) administrative-based entities. Network centrality
focuses on the interactions that occur between administrative-based entities and the
power relationships that occur (Tichy & Fombrun, 1979). Actors interconnected closely
in the network by dependent workflows gain power because of the interdependencies that
make each actor indispensable within the network. Lateral or horizontal violence occurs
between individuals who are part of the same organizational hierarchy and engage in
verbal and non-verbal or overt or covert forms of violence (The Center for American
Nurses, 2008; Scott, 2008).
Current Perspectives on Workplace Bullying
Researchers have found that in highly industrialized areas, there is evidence to
support that the incidence and severity of occupational violence and bullying are being
reported over time with increasing prevalence (Mayhew et al., 2004; Namie, 2007).
According to Lutgen-Sandvik et al. (2007), the targets of workplace bullying report
feeling ashamed of being defenseless when confronted by a perpetrator. Targets of

52
workplace bullying are known to have short- and long-term health problems including
psychological and psychosomatic stress systems so severe that in some cases the target
suffers permanently or commits homicide or suicide (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2001;
Namie & Namie, 2003; Rafferty, 2007; Esler et al., 2008). Many of the targets of
workplace bullying suffer shame and lowered self-esteem, physical health problems,
diminished cognitive functioning, and degraded overall emotional health (Einarsen &
Mikkelsen, 2003; Salin, 2003b; Esler).
According to Yildiz (2007), the effects of psychological abuse on employees vary
from feeling burned out, desperate, angry, and fearful, to experiencing an overall sense of
loss in efficacy. Targets of workplace bullying who were able to find methods of coping
through the development of protective mechanisms were found to still experience
significant trauma as a result of having experienced workplace bullying (Lutgen-Sandvik,
2006; Nielsen et al., 2008). The more severe the experience of workplace bullying, the
less likely the mitigating value of available protective factors (Nielsen).
Race and ethnicity were found to be related to confidence of the target in the
organization to effectively minimize or eliminate bullying behavior (Jackson et al., 2007;
Lewis & Gunn, 2007). In a study conducted by Fox and Stallworth (2005), bullying
targets in the racial/ethnic group expressed being less effective in responding to
workplace bullying due to low confidence in the organization to reduce the bullying
occurrences. Many of the targets in the racial/ethnic group reported negative emotions
and changes in attitude when the perpetrator was a supervisor. A lack of trust in the
system to protect them was cited as the primary reason for an overall lack of confidence
and assurance (Lewis & Gunn). In the nursing profession, bullying linked to racism is
53
increasingly being reported, leading to investigations into the allegations by British
regulatory organizations such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), the
Republican Communist Network (RCN), Unison, and the Council for Healthcare
Regulatory Excellence (CHRE) (Doult & Scott, 2008).
In some cases, experiences of workplace bullying were found by researchers to be
different; depending on ethnicity. In a study conducted by Lewis and Gunn (2007), ethnic
(non-white) workers experienced higher frequencies of negative behaviors associated
with workplace bullying than white workers. Ethnic workers were also found to
experience more personal bullying than white workers, including exposure to offensive
comments about ethnicity, humiliation, and exclusion.
According to Neuman and Baron (2003), targets often experience feelings of
dread, isolation, demoralization, and the inability to escape or prevent being bullied.
In a survey conducted by Namie and Namie (2003), individuals who had been targets of
workplace bullying were found to suffer from numerous health issues including, but not
limited to, depression and affective disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance
abuse and other self-destructive habits, anxiety, sleep disturbances, and homicidal and
suicidal ideation and tendencies. Although the bullying of targets has shown to have
negative consequences, in many states of the U.S., the mistreatment of workers on the job
is not legally actionable because of the lack of awareness and understanding of the
dynamics involved and the short- and long-term influence bullying has on society overall
(Yamada, 2004).
The economic impact of workplace bullying has been reported as detrimental for
both the employee and the employer. According to Namie and Namie (2003), 51% of
54
employee respondents to a survey lost income as a result of excessive sick leave or
quitting the job. In some cases, the only thing that made bullying stop was to leave the
place of employment, and for some workers the possibility of reintegrating back into the
workforce was difficult. In that same survey, 11% of respondents transferred but kept the
same jobs with that employer, 38% left voluntarily for self-preservation, and 44% were
expelled in a method controlled by the employer (Namie & Namie).
The damage of workplace bullying is costly to organizations, communities,
families, and may explain why there is a shortage of IT workers in the industry.
According to Maudgalya et al. (2006), the IT workplace experiences a high rate of
turnover, absenteeism, and decreased productivity due to excessive demands and work
hours, strict deadlines, intimidation, information withholding, and budget constraints.
Exposure to risk factors makes the IT worker especially prone to negative work outcomes
such as job stress, burnout, and job dissatisfaction. The damage caused by risk factors is
financially detrimental to the employer (Major et al., 2007). An economic influence to the
employer is decreased employee productivity, attrition and absenteeism, turnover
intention, an overall decline in work quality, and dissatisfied customers (Maudgalya et
al.). The additional costs of recruiting, retraining, and establishing a new employee can
actually surpass the costs of an employee’s total annual compensation package
(Maudgalya et al.).
More organizations are beginning to realize that a method of dealing with the
problem of workplace bullying is necessary to ensure that the workplace environment is
productive. According to Meglich-Sespico et al., (2007) and Faley and Knapp (2007), the
most effective strategy for dealing with workplace bullying involves a combination of an
55
effective intervention approach on the part of the organization and legislation that
supports restitution and compensation to targets of workplace bullying. Relief to the
target encompasses the elimination of bullying behavior and the treatment of the target’s
injuries (Meglich-Sespico et al.).
Organizations that foster the development of psychological safety through high-
quality interpersonal relationships among employees are able to improve organizational
performance (Carmeli et al., 2008). The nursing organization workplace has been
identified as one in which workplace bullying occurs quite frequently (Hutchinson et al.,
2008; Scott, 2008). In order to further investigate and understand the impact of workplace
bullying on the nursing work environment, an inventory was developed to address
specific workplace bullying constructs but within the nursing context (Hutchinson, 2008).
Health organizations are seeking to educate staff and health care team members on how
to improve social interactions, proper business etiquette, and foster positive people skills
in the work environment (Trossman, 2008; Martin, 2008; Kerfoot, 2008). Proactive
measures and the fostering of a psychologically safe environment through the
management of workplace bullying are viewed as having implications on the ability to
manage costs, and improve quality and satisfaction among patients, doctors, nurses and
families in hospital environments (Martin; Kerfoot; Scott, 2008).
In using personal coping strategies, seeking help from an employee assistance
program (EAP), attending counseling sessions with a healthcare provider, and eventually
soliciting legal assistance, the target of workplace bullying is able to experience a sense
of relief and redress (Meglich-Sespico et al., 2007). Personal resilience was found to
mitigate adverse work environments and those employees who were able to develop the
56
ability to adjust to negative work environments were able to thrive in those environments
(Jackson et al., 2007). Many victims of workplace bullying are not able to seek help
because of a depleted sense of resiliency and overall feelings of disempowerment.
Organizations need to advocate for changes in policy and procedure to both intervene and
ultimately prevent workplace bullying from occurring.
Prevalence
In general, prevalence rates of workplace bullying vary between countries,
industries, work sectors, and methods of measurement (Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007).
The targets of bullying are male and female of varied age groups, within all industries,
and are present at all organizational levels and job roles (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). In
a large research study of UK workers, the prevalence of bullying was shown to be at 10%
(Hoel, Cooper, & Faragher, 2001). A review of 31 European studies conducted between
1989 and 2001 demonstrated that prevalence of serious bullying behavior was between
1% and 4% (Zapf, Einarsen, Hoel, & Vartia, 2003). Researchers have shown that as
much as 5% to 10% of the workforce has been exposed to the problem of bullying at any
point in time.
In a study conducted among nursing teaching staff, a large percentage (91%) of
the nursing school employees who participated reported being a witness to mobbing
behaviors in the institution where the nursing school employees worked and 17% had
been directly exposed to mobbing in the workplace (Yeldirim et al., 2007). Those staff
who had been exposed reported experiencing various reactions to the behavior, including
changes in emotional and physiological state, and different social reactions (Yeldirim).
57
The current research literature depicts prevalence rates as varying greatly because
of the differences in definitions and time periods used to define workplace bullying in the
studies that have been conducted in the last 10 to 15 years (Agervold, 2007). According
to Strandmark and Hallberg (2007), bullying prevalence among the public service sector
is found in cases where a power struggle has been occurring over time. Specifically, the
targets of the power struggle were individuals who perceived themselves as
disempowered and vulnerable or as strong and self-efficacious. Conflict that was
unresolved escalated the power struggle, creating a chronic bullying pattern and
conversely, conflict that was resolved lessened the disparity of the power differential,
lessening the bullying (Strandmark & Hallberg). A review of the literature that surveyed
30 various studies on workplace bullying concluded,
“Between 1-4% of employees may experience serious bullying, and between 8-
10% occasional bullying. Between 10 and 20 percent (or even higher) of
employees may occasionally be confronted with negative social behavior at work
which does not correspond to definitions of bullying but which is stressful for the
persons concerned nevertheless” (Zapf et al., 2003, p. 121).
Forms of Workplace Bullying
The forms or types of workplace bullying have been grouped under three general
sets of behaviors: superordinate, intermediate, and subordinate (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.,
2007). The superordinate group includes a continuum of general behaviors considered
harmful actions and interactions that occur in the workplace. Bullying, aggression,
counterproductive behaviors, antisocial and deviant acts, and other injustices are all
indicated as superordinate. The intermediate group includes the superordinate behaviors

58
and emotional abuse, harassment, and mistreatment. Sexual or ethnic harassment and
discrimination due to age, race, and disability are all included in the intermediate group
(Lutgen-Sandvik et al.). Subordinate behaviors include the intermediate group and other
phenomena such as victimization, incivility, and verbal aggressiveness. Each group and
the associated constructs are only suggested as a means of organizing behaviors and a
degree of overlap between groups is common (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.).
Antecedents of Workplace Bullying
The antecedents of workplace bullying have been classified in the literature as
societal, organizational, and individual (McCormack, Casimir, & Djurkovic, 2007).
According to Hauge et al. (2007), contributory factors to workplace bullying that are
present may serve as possible explanations for bullying. Individual, dyadic, group,
organizational, and societal factors have all been cited as specific conditions that are
conducive to bullying behavior (Salin, 2008). Organizational culture factors such as low
job status, mismanagement, and dysfunctional leadership styles have been found to
facilitate the likelihood of workplace bullying (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Einarsen et al.,
2003; Hauge et al.). Hodson et al. (2006) present having a low job status using the
concept of relational powerlessness in which the bullying occurs in a vertical “top down”
direction, from supervisor to subordinate. According to Blau (1964), power and
powerlessness occur in a relational manner based on a continuum of experiences
involving rights and relationships.
Individuals who are not proficient in communication and social skills, who were
childhood bullies, or who possess a history of aggressive behavior are also known to
engage in bullying behavior (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007;
59
Namie, 2007). Interpersonal conflicts that escalate to the extent that a power imbalance
occurs leave the individual unable to defend against the amount and intensity of the
occurrences of conflict (Skogstad, Einarsen et al., 2007). In a large study conducted by
Hauge et al. (2007), bullying was found to be prevalent in stressful work environments
characterized by destructive leadership styles and in cases where supervisor intervention
into conflict does not occur.
Individuals who appear weak or vulnerable, exhibit nervousness or anxiety, or
behave too aggressively are often bullied (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al.,
2007; Glasø et al., 2007; Zapf & Einarsen, 2003). Overachievers and people who seem
different than the “norm” are also selected as targets. Perpetrators of bullying are often
found to be suffering from low self-esteem, lacking empathy for the human condition,
possess a Type A personality, have little self-control, and have explosive personalities
(Djurkovic, McCormack, & Casimir, 2005; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie &
Namie, 2003; Skogstad, Matthiesen et al., 2007). The reaction to bullying is sometimes
found to be based on the type of bullying to which one is exposed. Coping mechanisms
include those behaviors that the individual engages in to deal with the bullying behavior.
Substance abusers, victims of childhood or adult abuse, and those individuals who are
power driven may actually reciprocate with bullying behavior. Ólafsson and
Jóhannsdóttir (2004) created the taxonomy of victim responses using three categories of
behavioral reactions: (a) assertiveness, (b) avoidance, and (c) seek help. In some cases,
the target of bullying was found to engage in aggression, violence, and sabotage due to
prolonged abuse and isolation (Neuman & Baron, 2003).

60
In a study conducted by Milam et al., (2009), the characteristics of the target were
investigated to determine whether personality traits increase the likelihood that the target
will experience bullying or workplace incivility. Traits such as agreeableness,
neuroticism, and extraversion were posited as possibly provoking the target to perceive
higher frequencies of bullying. The trait of agreeableness was found by the researchers to
be a factor related to whether or not an individual experienced bullying or whether or not
a coworker perceived the target as capable of provoking bullying. An indirect
relationship between agreeableness and experienced bullying was determined when
measured using the individual or coworkers’ perspective (Milam, 2009).
The organizational climate is also a factor related to the presence and perpetuation
of bullying (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; McKay, Huberman-
Arnold, Fratzl, & Thomas, 2008; Salin, 2003a). Toxic organizational cultures perpetuate
systemic bullying through the acceptance and manipulation of dysfunctional subcultures
within the organization (McKay et al.). Work environments that possess occupational
stressors such as a workforce that is competitive, highly driven, chaotic, and conflict-
filled have been found to perpetuate bullying behavior as an organizational cultural norm.
Job insecurity, being watched by supervisors, increased pressure to conform, and
autocratic or authoritarian leadership styles are factors that have been associated with a
high prevalence of workplace bullying (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al.,
2007; Salin, 2003b). The social antecedents of workplace bullying include the increased
pressure and competition caused by the globalization of business, employees in fear of
losing jobs due to cutbacks, outsourcing, off-shoring, and having an executive-level bully
as a supposed model of success based on bullying tactics used to succeed.

61
Organizational changes and factors present in the working environment have been
found to be associated with bullying in the workplace (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Hoel &
Salin, 2003; McCormack et al., 2007; Neuman & Baron, 2003). Role conflict, increasing
pressure to perform, lack of control, and a critical work environment contribute to
bullying at work on the organizational level (Agervold & Mikkelsen, 2004; McCormack
et al., 2007). Employees often experience dissatisfaction and frustration with the working
environment and this phenomenon has been found to foster a bullying environment
(Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Salin, 2003b). Specific areas of concern include a lack of
control over the job, role conflict and ambiguity, organizational constraints, and
undefined goals and expectations. Inefficient communication strategies, information
withholding, and high degrees of stress have also been found to correlate with bullying
(Hoel & Cooper, 2001; Hodson et al., 2006; Salin).
Dynamics that enable, motivate, and precipitate bullying behavior and in which
no intervention occurs on the part of organizational leadership have been found to create
the negative, stressful work environment that strains workers to become perpetrators or
targets of workplace bullying (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.; Rafferty, 2007). Leadership that
exhibits destructive behavior in the form of an autocratic leadership style has also been
presented as a contributory factor to workplace bullying (Hoel & Salin). Conversely,
organizational leaders who model high-quality interpersonal relationships among
employees and encourage a positive organizational learning experience are able to
improve organizational performance (Carmeli et al., 2008).
Organizational culture has been found to foster and perpetuate bullying behavior
among supervisors and subordinates (Glendinning, 2001; Heames & Harvey, 2006;
62
Moayed, Daraiseh, Shell, & Salem, 2006; Rafferty, 2007; LeVan & Martin, 2008). The
power relations that are present in the workplace and the ultimate outcome of each
interaction between dyads and groups will determine the level of conflict and chaos
experienced in the organizational culture leading to workplace bullying (Hodson et al.,
2006; LeVan & Martin, 2008). In many cases, the power disparity leaves the target
unable to defend against the negative bullying behavior (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007).
Relational powerlessness of actors and interactions that take place within the
organizational context has been found to enable interactional powerlessness throughout
the organization on a structural level.
The visibility of bullying, accountability of perpetrators, and the capacity of the
organization to create norms through rules and rewards serve as motivational foundations
for whether or not bullying is condoned in the organization (Hodson et al.). According to
Glendinning, the human resource department should play a role in eliminating workplace
bullying at the point of hiring individuals through the provision of policies and
procedures that demonstrate a lack of tolerance for bullying behavior. Involving
employees in the process of creating policies that demonstrate intolerance for workplace
bullying allows the employer and the employee to play an active role in the quality of the
work environment (Rocker, 2008).
A systematic review of the risk factors and outcomes for workplace bullying was
conducted by Moayed et al., 2006. The purpose for the analysis of the literature was to
investigate possible links between factors of the workplace and bullying, and between
bullying and outcomes. Problems in the organization and workplace bullying were found
to be linked and individual personality traits were found to be associated with workplace
63
bullying (Moayed et al.). The review also presented a gap in the research literature
pertaining to the characteristics of the perpetrator. A model of workplace bullying based
on the findings of Moayed et al. (2006) is presented (see Appendix I).
Enabling Structures and Processes
Perceived power imbalance, low perceived costs, dissatisfaction and frustration
have been found to create an environment that facilitates bullying (Salin, 2003b). When a
power imbalance is present, the target-bully dyad structure enables bullying. Abusive
supervision increases workplace deviance due to aggression directed toward the
subordinates who subsequently respond with negative behavior towards the supervisor or
others (Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007). Organizational power differences are found to be
related to societal power differences, leading to bullying based on gender, job position, or
ethnicity (LeVan & Martin, 2008; McDonald & Dear, 2008; Hoel & Cooper, 2001).
Occupations that traditionally revolve around dominance, such as the prison system, law
enforcement, and the medical field, emulate the power dyad during the normal
interactions and relationships that occur in the profession (Drake et al., 2007; Lines,
2007; Wrong, 2004; Peel, 2001). Disempowering acts and the perceptions of
disempowering experiences can lead to a negative affective response resulting in lowered
self-efficacy, diminished internal locus of control, and decreased motivation resulting in
poor performance and productivity (Young, Vance, & Ensher, 2003).
The concept of perceived cost assessment is related to the bully perceiving that
the costs of engaging in bullying behavior are relatively low in comparison to perceived
benefit (Salin, 2003b; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007). A laissez-faire leadership style in the
organization has been found to create a work environment that facilitates bullying
64
because little to no intervention occurs, and subsequently the bully does not have to
accept responsibility for his/her behavior (Hauge et al., 2007; Hoel & Cooper, 2001).
Organizational culture can also serve to perpetuate bullying behavior; especially in work
environments in which bullying is the norm or no policies exist to dissuade bullying.
According to Brodsky (1976), the primary reason that harassment exists is because the
culture in which harassment exists permits and rewards that harassment. Bullying
behavior is often modeled and in some cases bullying behavior is rewarded and
considered an act of loyalty (Hoel & Salin, 2003). A workplace based on incivility has
been found to perpetuate bullying and violent behavior through the reinforcement and
strengthening process of the socialization process.
Motivating Structures and Processes
Salin (2003b) presents the explanation that the perpetrator of bullying is
sometimes rewarded by harassing others in the workplace. Motivational factors include
“high internal competition, certain forms of reward systems and expected benefits for the
perpetrator” (Salin, p. 1222). Perpetrators may perceive a benefit from engaging in
bullying behavior and if the benefits outweigh the costs, perpetrators will rationalize
participation in such behavior. This reward system is thought to contribute to vertical and
horizontal bullying. A superordinate or supervisor may perceive a subordinate who is
highly skilled as a career threat (Woelfle & McCaffrey, 2007). Reward may be sought by
attempting to sabotage or disparage the work performance of the subordinate. In cases
where the quality of interaction between superior and subordinate was poor, the
subordinate was found to be more likely to exert less physical or mental effort in
complying with the requests made by the superior (Gupta & Sharma, 2008). In some
65
cases, the harassment and negative behavior on the part of the superior is designed to
create a work environment that motivates the subordinate to leave or transfer to another
location. In extreme cases, the superordinate perpetrator brings about the demise of the
subordinate by causing his/her termination from the workplace (Salin).
Motivating structures and Precipitating structures and

processes processes
1. Internal competition 1. Restructuring and crises
2. Reward system and expected benefits 2. Other organizational changes
3. Bureaucracy and difficulties to lay off 3. Changes in management/composition of
employees work group
Enabling structures and processes

1. Perceived power imbalance
2. Low perceived costs
3. Dissatisfaction and frustration
BULLYING POSSIBLE AND MORE LIKELY
Figure 1. Enabling, motivating, and precipitating structures and processes in the work
environment that contribute to bullying (Salin, 2003b).
Precipitating Structures and Processes
Organizational changes such as downsizing and changes in work group
composition are viewed as catalysts for workplace bullying (Salin, 2003b). Researchers
have shown that critical changes in the organization are perceived by the workforce as
crises that will ultimately have a negative influence. Layoffs, job elimination, increased
workloads, and cost-cutting have been found to create significant pressure and stress,
66
lowered tolerance, and aggressive tendencies (Hoel & Cooper, 2001). Employees
experience feelings of powerlessness and subsequently react by engaging in aggressive
and retaliatory behaviors in an effort to “right the wrong” that has occurred and gain
control. Other employees may engage in disparagement of others in an effort to regain a
sense of power (Salin).
Influence of Workplace Bullying
Much of the research on workplace bullying has used analysis of questionnaire
survey data to measure the association between workplace bullying and negative
outcomes (Rayner et al., 2002). Numerous studies conducted in European countries have
found an association between workplace bullying and negative health outcomes. Targets
of workplace bullying suffer long-term psychological, physical, and occupational damage
that sometimes becomes permanent (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie & Namie, 2003;
Rayner et al.; Salin, 2001, 2003b; Salin, 2008). There is empirical evidence that suggests
that bullying has often been related to damages in overall physical and psychological
health, cognitive functioning, and emotional health for the target (Brodsky, 1976;
Einarsen & Mikkelsen, 2003; Keashly & Harvey, 2005; Namie & Namie). Anxiety,
depression, low-self esteem, and low affect are common outcomes for abused employees,
and prolonged stress disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder have been associated
with workplace bullying (Richman et al., 2005; Scott & Stradling, 2001).
In an autoethnography by Vickers (2007), the impact of workplace bullying was
detailed using Weick’s (1995) analysis of sensemaking. This approach to understanding
the experience of workplace bullying using the reflective perspective of the target was
presented as an important aspect of increasing awareness into the actual changes in

67
identity that occur for the target (Vickers). In using the autoethnographic approach, a
catharsis may actually improve the ability of the target to work through and recover from
some of the trauma caused exposure to workplace bullying.
Bullying also has been shown to have negative consequences on interpersonal
relationships with family and friends by impairing the ability of the target to engage in
healthy and functional relationships (Jennifer, Cowie, & Katerina, 2003; Rayner et al.,
2002; Tracy et al., 2006). In some cases, the target of workplace bullying is unable to
reintegrate into the workforce or requires a medical leave of absence to obtain intensive
rehabilitation therapy (Scott & Stradling, 2001). Witnesses to bullying were also found to
report higher anxiety and stress levels because of the fear of being made a target. In some
cases, turnover intention was linked to the fear of being the next identified target of the
bully (Vartia, 2001). Avoidance behavior was found to be engaged more often than
assertive or help-seeking behavior, which could also explain the reason turnover
frequently occurs as a response to workplace bullying (Djurkovic et al., 2005).
Work Sectors at Risk for Workplace Bullying
Certain work sectors or environments have been found to be associated with a
high prevalence of workplace bullying (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Hodson et al., 2006;
Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Salin, 2003b). Work environments that possess
characteristics such as high internal competition, politicized climate, organizational stress
factors, and structures of power have been found to be susceptible to workplace bullying
(Hodson et al.; Lutgen-Sandvik; Salin). Workplaces that possess high rates of burnout,
job dissatisfaction, turnover intention, and vertical or hierarchical interactions that are
aggressive are also prone to workplace bullying behavior. According to Salin, workplaces
68
that emphasize increased efficiencies, higher production speeds, and increased
competitiveness both internally and externally were more likely to experience bullying.
Organizational politics have been found to be associated with perceptions of
being bullied in the workplace (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Salin, 2003b; 2007). Extant
literature shows a link between organizational structure changes, downsizing, and
outsourcing with increased workloads and competitive behavior, lower job security,
reduced opportunities for promotion and job stability and the elimination of job positions
altogether (Salin). Organizations that experience trends such as those described are
known to be susceptible to organizational stress, decreased ability to manage aggression,
and the increased benefit of reducing perceived threats in the work environment. Salin
emphasized that when some perpetrators of bullying are faced with organizational
changes, bullying behavior could actually be viewed as a rational response or strategic
plan for dealing with the perceived threat. Internal competition and individuals who seek
to engage in high performance levels or who exhibit high standards may actually foster
bullying because individuals who cannot or refuse to meet those standards feel threatened
(Salin).
Work environments that experience conflict have been found to be prone to
bullying behavior (Ayoko, Callan, & Hartel, 2003). Specifically, intra-group conflict
events such as task and relationship conflict, and conflict intensity and duration were
found to be positively related to bullying behavior. The reactions and emotional
responses to conflict events were also found to be related to bullying behavior. This
finding has implications for increasing understanding as to how people perceive conflict
69
events in the work environment and the resulting affective changes and
counterproductive behaviors that occur in response to those events.
Industry work sectors that are considered to be structures of power have been
identified as possessing a work environment conducive to workplace bullying. Different
work environments and related characteristics have led researchers to understand that the
complexity of bullying comes from the variations found to exist in different work sectors
(Salin, 2003a). The study of power professions investigates structures of power from a
structural and organizational perspective. Structures of power are obtained through
knowledge possession and systematic and strategic measures with the goal of obtaining
monopolistic and prestigious positions in the market (Freidson, 1986).
The relationship between the creation, transmission, and application of formal
knowledge and exercise of power has been the basis of numerous research studies (Lapp,
1965). Formal knowledge is differentiated from common knowledge in that formal
knowledge is acquired by profession or development of expertise. Experts who possess
formal knowledge are also thought to possess power because formal knowledge is based
in a form of elitism as ascribed by societal norms (Freidson). In some cases, the
possession of formal knowledge is deemed threatening because individuals who possess
the knowledge dominate over those individuals who depend on that knowledge.
According to Foucault (1979), the formal knowledge of certain professions shape the way
institutions are organized and the way human behavior is conceptualized, providing a
rationale for the interpretation of human behavior.

70
The IT Work Sector
The IT professional is considered significantly valuable to the organization. Firms
depend on the IT professional to maintain the IT infrastructure in the organization in
order to remain competitive in industry (Niederman et al., 2006; Major et al., 2007). The
IT profession and overall industry is one that is considered a structure of power
(Baskerville, Stage, & DeGross, 2000). IT professionals’ possession of high-skilled
technical knowledge and information sought by the business world forces the
organization to depend on human capital control (Niederman et al.). Numerous
businesses and global organizations list the alignment of IT with the goals and objectives
of the business as one of the top critical success factors (Major et al., 2007).
According to Foucault (1979), power relations and controls are present by default
in the ability to implement technology. Those in society who are privileged in knowledge
control the ideologies that surround such goods as IT (Kvasny & Truex, 2000). The value
of technology is based on the cultural value established within the social group that
controls the creation, implementation, and sustainability in the economic and social
hierarchy (Kvasny & Truex). Those who understand the implications of technology,
typically IT professionals, are the ones who are not challenged as IT professionals
attempt to maintain the social order IT professionals have constructed. Technology is
viewed as maintaining and restructuring power relationships within the organization.
Power is perpetuated by those who have the knowledge to implement and understand
technology (Kvasny & Truex).
The demand for skilled IT professionals is extremely high. According to the U.S.
Department of Labor, IT will see a 68% boost in output growth between 2002 and 2012
71
(U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008-2009). Due to advancing of computer technology,
the expectation is that employment opportunities will increase as the demand and
development of new technologies and software applications increases and the need for
information security becomes more apparent (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Employers seek IT professionals who possess soft people skills, technical skills,
and knowledge that successfully transfers. Employers also seek the ability to adapt in the
workforce. Although IT remains a critical aspect of work in all industries and sectors, the
United States experiences a shortage of IT employees that possess the necessary skills to
succeed in a dynamic, change-driven work environment. The IT worker must update and
adapt the existing skill set in order to maintain the level of qualification necessary to
succeed in such a dynamic industry. The typical IT professional is considered to possess
the characteristics of high intelligence, high technical skills, depth and breadth of tacit
and explicit knowledge, motivation, drive, and innovation. IT workers must possess
strong problem-solving mindsets, be analytically adept, and knowledgeable of
algorithmic methods. Necessary soft skills include the need to communicate efficiently
and to use follow through, because troubleshooting and helping others are such vital
aspects of the job (Verma & Bedi, 2008). Because there is constant interaction on the job
with other individuals, computer support specialists must be able to communicate
effectively using various methods such as written, verbal and electronic (Verma & Bedi).
Extant research has found that stressful work environments are known to produce
workplace bullying as a related outcome (Carayon et al., 2006; Lutgen-Sandvik, 2007;
Hauge et al., 2007). The work environment of IT is known to possess negative work-
related attributes (Thong & Yap, 2000; Hacker, 2003; Carayon et al.). The profession
72
experiences a significant amount of occupational stress, absenteeism, burnout, and
turnover due to job demands (Carayon et al.; Sethi et al., 2004; Thong & Yap). Long
working hours, intense deadlines, budget restrictions, skill obsolescence, and information
overload are contributory factors to the negative aspects of the IT work environment.
Role ambiguity, role stress, perceived lack of control over resources, work overload,
conflicting needs, interpersonal conflict, uncertainty, and time pressures are also issues
that are known to be present (Sethi et al.).
IT work environments in which IT managers are prone to verbally assault and
disempower workers are known to experience a high rate of turnover (Hacker, 2003). The
costs associated with replacing IT staff due to turnover are significant. The average cost
to replace an IT professional can vary from twice to seven times the worker’s salary
depending on circumstances involved (Kochanski & Ledford, 2001). Workplace bullying
may be a negative workplace outcome that is present in the IT work environment.
Organizations that gain awareness into the problem of workplace bullying and the
benefits of empowerment may be able to mitigate risk factors and preserve shareholder
value due to realized cost savings.
Individuals who maintain leadership roles in IT need to place an emphasis on
technical expertise and strategic relationship building (Medcof, 2007). The chief
technology officer (CTO) position is one that uses several bases of power, including
structural power, expert power, ownership power, and prestige power. If not managed
effectively, the bases of power will have a negative influence on the ability of the CTO to
fill the leadership roles needed to engage in strategic decision-making and to cultivate
high-quality relationships in the workplace (Medcof).

73
Psychological Empowerment
Historical Overview
Psychological empowerment is the social action process that occurs on an
individual, group, or organizational level in which the entity involved is able to maintain
mastery of the perception and possession of control over situational factors (Spreitzer &
Doneson, 2007). Psychological empowerment in the workplace became very relevant in
the 1960s during at which time the Civil Rights Movement and anti-war protests were
common events (Spreitzer & Doneson). Maslow’s (1971) theory of self-actualization
posited that an individual who was self-actualized was empowered to function at fullest
capability based on the level of control the individual perceives over the life situation. An
individual who was unable to achieve self-actualization, what Maslow called a neurotic,
was thought to be limited by either individual or societal forces. Unhealthy societies were
thought to create unhealthy people as a result. Maslow felt that people have an intrinsic
need to have a sense of self-determination, autonomy, dignity, and to hold responsibility
in order to remain healthy and function in a growth-motivated manner. When individuals
are part of an environment in which achievement of goals is impossible and those
individuals are held subject to the will of others, feelings of self-esteem and self-worth
decrease (Maslow).
In the early 1960s, McGregor presented the idea of the traditional “Theory X”
organization (McGregor, 1960). His theory held that the rigidity of the management
structure and the need to constantly supervise employees in order to obtain quality work
actually brought about the opposite effect. Because workers were not permitted to be
autonomous, make decisions, or trusted to get the job done, an unhealthy level of work
74
functioning was the result. Authoritative supervision strategies impede growth and
learning for the employee (McGregor). Theories of psychological empowerment have
implications for workplace environments that perpetuate a persistent negative or positive
organizational culture.
Empowerment Perspectives
According to Spreitzer and Doneson (2007), the extant literature of management
researchers have focused on three theoretical perspectives to investigate and understand
empowerment: (a) social-structural, (b) psychological, and (c) critical. The focus of the
social-structural perspective is on the power that is shared in a systemic environment, and
power as a concept is related to have control over the resources in the organization
(Conger & Kanungo, 1988). The extent to which employees are empowered is based on
the amount of delegation of responsibility that occurs on the part of the organization.
According to Bowen and Lawler (1995), an employee is only empowered to the extent
the organization distributes power, information, knowledge and rewards. Empowerment-
based intervention programs were found to be effective at allowing employees with
chronic illnesses to remain on the job, but in some cases job retention was contingent on
the employee’s ability and responsibility to solve problems (Varekamp et al., 2006;
Makaros & Itzhaky, 2008). An employee’s sense of empowerment was also attributed to
the structuring of role assignment, opportunities for participation in the decision-making
process, the cultivation of superior-subordinate relationships, and the ability to establish
collaborative peer relations in the work environment (Varekamp et al.).
The social-structural perspective on empowerment is based on social exchange
theory and social power theory (Spreitzer & Doneson, 2007). Although both theories will
75
be used as a basis for this study, the psychological perspective rather than the social-
structural perspective will be used as a basis for conceptualizing empowerment in this
study. The primary reason for this is that empowerment theorists have cited the social-
structural perspective as being limited to a societal view rather than a view that focuses
on empowerment as experienced by the individual (Spreitzer, 1995; 1996). Because this
study will be investigating the perception of workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment as reported by the individual, the psychological perspective of
empowerment will be emphasized.
The psychological perspective is based on those psychological factors that cause
individuals to feel control over their personal lives. Personal efficacy is achieved through
the motivation to perform tasks and the belief in capability of oneself to perform said
tasks (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) posited that
empowerment was a multidimensional construct comprised of four cognitions. The
work role was divided into the following four dimensions: (1) meaningfulness, (2)
competence, (3) choice or self-determination, and (4) sense of impact.
The critical perspective is rooted in post-modern theory and deconstructionism
(Spreitzer & Doneson, 2007). This ideology posits that employees who are not owners or
represented fairly in an organization are not empowered because of the hierarchical
control structures that are present in the organization. The power in the organization does
not reside with the employee, but rather with the individuals at the top of the hierarchy
(Wendt, 2001). The perspective is considered by most researchers to be lacking a concise

76
conceptualization of empowerment and because of the limitations, is frequently not relied
upon (Spreitzer & Doneson).
The Psychological Empowerment Process
Many researchers refer to Bandura’s (1977) theory of behavioral change through
the presence of self-efficacy (Bandura; McClelland, 1975; Molm, 1990). Psychological
empowerment as a process is viewed as a mechanism of increasing an individual’s level
of self-efficacy, and conversely, psychological disempowerment decreases an
individual’s level of self-efficacy. A person’s sense of powerlessness is a function of the
amount of belief that a person has that he/she can cope with situations in daily life. The
individual is viewed as being in need of self-determination and in need to control and
cope with the demands presented to them. The individual is motivated by the need to gain
control over the outcome of a situation (Molm). According to Bandura, an individual is
empowered when personal efficacy expectations are strengthened. The greater a person
perceives his or her inner strength, the higher the expectation of the individual that
coping is possible. Efficacy expectations will influence the amount of effort made and for
how long when confronted with difficult experiences and situations.
According to extant research on psychological empowerment in the workplace,
the process of psychological empowerment can mitigate negative organizational changes
and enable employees to improve performance in highly competitive organization and
industry environments (Molm, 1990). Organizational dynamics such as communication
systems, network formation, resource access, and job design are thought to serve as
contributory factors to employee powerlessness (Kanter, 1977). Organizations that limit
autonomy, inhibit expression and innovation, and undergo significant organizational

77
structure changes will experience a disruption in the psychological empowerment process
(Kanter).
In a study of Filipino service workers conducted by Hechanova et al. (2006),
psychological empowerment was found to be positively correlated with employees’
satisfaction on the job and with overall work performance. In Taiwan’s state-owned
enterprises, psychological empowerment was found to mediate between the impact of
change related to work redesign and organizational commitment on the part of the
employee who possesses an external locus of control (Chen & Chen, 2008). Another
study investigated and found support for the ability of psychological empowerment to be
a predecessor to organizational commitment among Indian managers (Bhatnagar, 2005).
Psychological Empowerment Constructs
Psychological empowerment as a relational and motivational construct is derived
from the constructs of power and control (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). In the management
and sociological literature, power is used to describe perceived power or control that an
actor or organizational unit has over another. In social exchange theory (Blau, 1964;
Emerson, 1962; Homans, 1961; Thibault & Kelley, 1959), power is interpreted as a
mechanism of the dependence and interdependence between actors. The power that is
derived is based on the contingency of the performance outcomes of the actor and is a
direct result of the behavioral responses of others (Thibault & Kelley). An actor’s ability
to provide knowledge or other resources to an organization to permit that organization to
mitigate problems or maintain competitiveness demonstrates power at the organizational
level. At the interpersonal level, the primary sources of power an actor has over others
has been presented in the literature as being based on (a) the position or job role of the
78
actor, (b) the personal attributes of the actor, (c) the expertise of the actor, and (d) the
opportunity of that actor to gain access to specialized information or knowledge (French
& Raven, 1959). The bases of power are a function of what areas of control the actor
possesses and the extent to which the conditions that perpetuate dependence on that actor
are present.
Psychological empowerment as a relational construct is viewed in the literature as
power exercised over resources by a manager. The extent to which a manager shares that
power with a subordinate by making available organizational resources demonstrates the
degree of psychological empowerment that is present in the organization (Burke, 1986;
Gupta & Sharma, 2008). The decentralization of decision-making power and the level of
autonomy present in the organization are considered to be an indication as to what extent
the employees are empowered in the organization.
Psychological empowerment as a motivational construct is presented in the
psychological literature as individuals possessing the need to influence and control life
events and situations as a coping mechanism. According to McClelland (1975),
individuals have the need to exert control over others in order to influence and control
ideas and actions. Power as a motivational force, involves the belief that one is capable or
in possession of the skills or resources to be self-efficacious (Bandura, 1977b).
Management strategies that strengthen the self-efficacy of the employee will empower
the employee; conversely, management strategies that undermine the beliefs of the
employee will increase the level of powerlessness experienced by that employee.
Although some management research refers to psychological empowerment as a means
of delegation, McClelland stated that an enabled employee is one who is empowered

79
through the creation of conditions conducive to the accomplishing the development of
personal self-efficacy. Barriers to psychological empowerment are identified and
corrective actions are taken to remove those barriers.
Psychological Empowerment as a Mitigating Factor in Workplace Bullying
Psychological empowerment has been defined in the literature as the giving of
power (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Power is presented as the authorization or provision
of authority, capability, and energy. A workforce that is empowered is motivated to
participate in behaviors and strategies involving commitment, risk-taking, and
innovation. Employees who are empowered perceive a sense of purpose in tasks
performed and will positively value those experiences and be intrinsically motivated to
engage in those tasks (Thomas & Velthouse).
Targets of workplace bullying have been found to experience role ambiguity,
withholding of information, little delegation of responsibility, and excessive criticism of
work performed (Salin, 2003a; Makaros & Itzhaky, 2008). Researchers have shown that
employees in a workplace environment in which bullying is prevalent will possess a lack
of commitment and motivation, poor productivity, and low morale (Salin, 2003b). The
nature and quality of the relationship between superior and subordinate were both
determined to have a significant impact of the overall performance of the subordinate
(Jha & Nair, 2008). A positive relationship, in which the superior provided an adequate
support system to the subordinate, encouraged the development of an efficacious internal
locus of control and psychological empowerment. Subordinates reported high task
motivation and a positive perception of the work environment as a result (Jha & Nair).
According to Chan et al., (2008), subordinates’ development of trust was largely

80
influenced by the extent to which the subordinate felt psychologically empowered by
dynamics of social exchange in the organizational culture. This trust was found to foster
innovative approaches to performing tasks, leading to increased goal attainment and
productivity levels (Chan et al., 2008).
Employees who are psychologically empowered are able to determine work roles,
feel capable of accomplishing meaningful work-related tasks, and are able to influence
the decision-making process in the workplace (Yukl & Becker, 2006; Makaros &
Itzhaky, 2008). Employees who experienced positive performance feedback were found
to be more motivated to engage in work-related tasks critical to the success of the of the
organization. Due to increased perception of the impact the employee had on the overall
outcome of the organization, the employee reported a sense of empowerment through
intrinsic reward systems (Drake et al., 2007).
Incidence reporting of workplace bullying in the U.S. has been on the rise and
individuals, families, businesses and the economy have been found to suffer negative
consequences in various ways (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Neuman & Baron, 2003;
Salin, 2003; Zapf & Einarsen, 2001). Much of the research that has been conducted on
workplace bullying has occurred in European and Nordic countries (Zapf & Einarsen),
but research in the United States is minimal (Lutgen-Sandvik, 2007). Researchers outside
of the United States have shown that workplace bullying is a widespread phenomenon in
many countries (Zapf & Einarsen; Salin 2007).
Researchers have suggested that increasing knowledge about power structures and
power imbalances in organizations would facilitate awareness towards the creation
organizational policies and practices designed to address organizational power

81
differences (Salin, 2003). An imbalance of power is one of the primary characteristics of
bullying (Howie et al, 2002; Lutgen-Sandvik, 2003; Salin). Individuals who feel inferior
or incapable of defending themselves during interaction with another become victim to
the power dyad (Heames & Harvey, 2006). One of the important aspects of measuring
bullying includes the perception on the part of the target and the extent to which that
person feels disempowered (Hodgson et al., 2006).
have been found to create an environment that facilitates bullying (Salin, 2003). When a
power imbalance is present, the target-bully dyad structure enables and perpetuates
bullying. Disempowering acts and the perceptions of disempowering experiences can
lead to a negative affective response resulting in lowered self-efficacy, diminished
internal locus of control, and decreased motivation resulting in poor performance and
productivity (Young et al., 2003).
Organizational power differences are found to be related to societal power
differences, leading to bullying based on age, ethnicity, gender, job type, and work sector
(public or private) (McDonald & Dear, 2008; Hoel and Cooper, 2001). In a study
conducted at University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST) in
the United Kingdom, individuals between the ages of 35-44 were found to experience
higher rates of exposure to workplace bullying in comparison to older age groups, but
lesser rates than younger employees. In a study conducted by Lutgen-Sandvik (2007),
older workers ages 26 and above experienced more peer-to-peer bullying than younger
workers. Older workers who were targets of workplace bullying as young adults were
found to be more aggressive towards peers as maturity and experience on the job
82
increased. Peer bullying is posited as being linked to the downsizing trends associated
with maximizing the efficiency of organizations and the need for self-preservation in the
workforce (Lutgen-Sandvik, 2007).
Occupations that traditionally revolve around dominance, such as the prison
system, law enforcement, and the medical field emulate the power dyad during the
normal interactions and relationships that occur in the profession. According to Wrong
(2004), power is present in occupations in which competent authority exists. In the case
of technology, the specialized expertise possessed by IT professionals is often viewed as
worthy of attributing status to the individual who holds that knowledge (Freidson, 1986;
Wrong, 2004).
factors that cause individuals to feel control in their personal life. Personal efficacy is
perform said tasks (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) posited
that empowerment was a multidimensional construct comprised of four cognitions. The
work role was divided into the following four dimensions: (1) meaning, (2) competence,
(3) self-determination, and (4) impact.
This investigative process integrated both quantitative and correlational analysis
and may provide organizations with the additional knowledge that may lead to the
identification of the root causes of workplace bullying. Possible mitigation value of
psychological empowerment, the creation of administrative, public, and legislative

83
policies to address the issue of workplace bullying, and the overall improvement in
related negative outcomes for employees and employers may be achieved.
Current Trends
More organizations are beginning to recognize workplace bullying as having
implications on the bottom line and overall success of the business, but numerous
employers remain unconcerned (Namie & Namie, 2003). At the Seventh International
Conference on Occupational Stress & Health, held in March 2008 in Washington, D.C.,
researchers gathered to present findings on workplace bullying. The symposium,
sponsored by the American Psychological Association (APA), the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and the Society for Occupational Health
Psychology (SOHP), consisted of numerous presentations on the negative influence of
workplace bullying, including the challenges faced by targets due to employer
indifference. In 62% of situations in which employers were made aware of the problem, it
resulted in no action being taken by the employer (Workplace Bullying Institute, 2007).
According to the Workplace Bullying Institute (2007), since 2003, 113 legislative
sponsors have endorsed legislation and 13 states have introduced forms of legislature
using the WBI anti-bullying, pro-employer Healthy Workplace Bill as a guide. At the 6th
International Conference on Workplace Bullying, held in Montreal, Canada in June 2008,
numerous researchers presented findings of studies conducted recently (Workplace
Bullying Institute, 2008). According to Namie and Namie (2003), there is resistance to
passing the Healthy Workplace Bill because lobbyists argue that many states’ economies
are dependent on unregulated employers. Some lawmakers who oppose the Healthy
Workplace Bill argued that bullying behavior cannot be accurately defined. According to
84
law professor Yamada (2004), the author of the Healthy Workplace Bill, the legislation
he drafted presents a concise definition of bullying behavior and provides that alleged
misconduct would have to be presented with sufficient evidence to make a case.
As of August 2008, Connecticut, New York, and Vermont had active legislation
pending in an attempt to move the Healthy Workplace Bill into law. Although numerous
politicians, health practitioners, employers, educators, researchers, and lobbyists have
come forth to support the Healthy Workplace Bill and 13 states have introduced the
legislation, nothing has been officially entered into law (Workplace Bullying Institute,
2008). The goal of such legislation is to provide a clear legal definition of bullying, a
formal procedure for handling allegations and cases, but ultimately to serve as a legal
deterrent to bullying behavior in the workplace with the hopes of decreasing the
increasing prevalence (Workplace Bullying Institute, 2008). With legal sanctions
impeding behaviors, perpetrators of workplace bullying may be able to engage in lifelong
behavioral changes through the assistance of training programs and behavioral
modification therapy (Browne & Smith, 2008).
Limitations of Past Research
Extant research on workplace bullying is limited in several aspects. The majority
of research studies has occurred in Scandinavian countries, and although each work
sector investigated is found to possess individual differences and unique organizational
dynamics, many work sectors have yet to be investigated. The IT workplace is one work
sector that has not been formally investigated to see if workplace bullying is a
contributory factor to the IT work environment. Additional limitations that are present in
the existing body of research are related to the lack of the acceptance of a universal
85
operational definition and measurement methodology for the construct of workplace
bullying.
In the United States, the existing body of research has grown somewhat in the
last decade; however, the concentration of research effort is generally considered to be
extremely limited in recency and scope in comparison to other countries (Lutgen-Sandvik
et al., 2007). Because recent research literature is limited within the United States, some
areas of this study relied on germinal literature in the area of workplace bullying and
related phenomena. Furthermore, investigations into how workplace bullying and
empowerment are related are also not found in extant literature. The nature of the
responses to workplace bullying on the part of different departments and personnel in
organizations has not been studied (Salin, 2003a). Organizations that are resistant to
change may enable bullying behavior through the lack of empowerment that is present in
the organizational culture. This lack of empowerment may increase the frequency,
intensity, and duration of workplace bullying, creating a perpetuating cycle of workplace
bullying behavior.
Conclusion
Workplace bullying in the IT work environment has not been investigated in
extant research. The purpose of this quantitative, descriptive, explanatory, correlational
study was to conduct an empirical investigation to determine the extent to which a
relationship exists between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT
work environment. This research also looked at how often workplace bullying occurs and
in what forms, and the extent to which IT professionals perceive themselves on four
dimensions of psychological empowerment.

86
A consistent theme developed as a result of the literature review presented in
chapter 2. All studies cited in the literature review indicated how critical it is for
organizations to maintain a positive, empowered workplace culture in order to achieve
the highest levels of job satisfaction, commitment to the organization, and the reduction
in costs related to poor productivity, psychological disempowerment, employee turnover,
and workmen’s compensation claims. Equally interesting, all cited studies reported that
organizations were experiencing workplace bullying at some level and were faced with
the costs associated with resulting negative work outcomes.
While the majority of studies focused specifically on the prevalence and forms of
workplace bullying in various work sectors or environments, no extant research
investigated the prevalence and forms of workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment in the IT work environment or the relationship between workplace
bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. as indicated by
the literature review Workplace bullying and associated negative work outcomes are
becoming more prevalent in many work sectors or environments, and implications for
future research consistently cited the need to investigate the problem of workplace
bullying (Djurkovic et al., 2005; Hauge et al., 2007; Hodson et al., 2006; Keashly &
Neuman, 2005; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007; Workplace Bullying Institute,
2008; Yamada, 2004).
Summary
The review of the body of literature in Chapter 2 revealed that workplace bullying
is linked to negative outcomes for employees, employers, and society in general
(Yamada, 2004; Keashly & Neuman, 2005; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007;
Workplace Bullying Institute, 2008; Trossman, 2008). Although several work

87
environments have been investigated, a gap in the literature was found because the IT
work environment has yet to be investigated. The premise of this study was to investigate
the problem by focusing on the IT profession in the United States to develop knowledge
about workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. This quantitative,
correlational study determined the extent of workplace bullying that IT professionals
experienced, and the association of workplace bullying with psychological empowerment
within the United States. Chapter 3 provides details on the methodology used to
investigate the problem.

88
CHAPTER 3: METHOD
bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. This research
study also investigated differences in workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment scores based on gender, job type, and work sector. Information technology
professionals who are members of the AITP participated in the study. The research adds
to the extant knowledge regarding workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Chapter 1 presented the background for the study, the significance of this work as
related to leadership and the IT profession. A review of literature in chapter 2 focused on
workplace bullying, psychological empowerment, social exchange, power, and
organizational stress factors. Chapter 3 focuses on the methodology used to conduct the
research study.
Research Design
This quantitative correlational study evaluated the frequency of workplace
bullying among IT professionals overall and frequencies related to form of bullying
(work-related or personal), job type (executive or non-executive) and work sector (public
or private). The degree of association between each of four cognitive dimensions
associated with psychological empowerment and workplace bullying was assessed using
Pearson r correlations. The psychological dimensions of psychological empowerment, as
defined by Thomas and Velthouse (1990), are meaning, competence, self-determination,
and impact. An independent sample t test was used to determine if differences related to
gender exist in the perception of psychological empowerment.

89
Two validated instruments were used for the research study, and both instruments
were administered to the sample. The Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ-R) was used to
measure perceived exposure to bullying and victimization at work (Einarsen, Raknes,
Matthiesen & Hellesøy, 1994). Participants were provided with an online questionnaire
list of 22 operationally-defined negative acts that have been associated with workplace
bullying and asked to select the number that best corresponds to perception of exposure
to the negative act over the last six months. A Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to
5 (Daily) was used. Workplace bullying was also be measured using a subjective method
in which participants are provided with a specific definition of workplace bullying and
asked to respond or self-identify as to perception of being exposed to workplace bullying
as target or as witness over specific periods within the last six months.
A second instrument, the Psychological Empowerment Instrument, developed by
Spreitzer (1995), was used to measure four dimensions of psychological empowerment as
related to self-orientations that people may have with regard to work role. This Likert-
type scale ranges from “A. Very Strongly Disagree” to “G. Very Strongly Agree.” The
statistical results between the NAQ and the Psychological Empowerment Instrument
were used to provide an indication as to whether perception of workplace bullying is
related to perception of psychological empowerment.
Hypotheses
Reports of workplace bullying in the U.S. have been on the rise and individuals,
families, businesses and the economy are all impacted in a negative manner and in
various ways (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Namie, 2007;
Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007; Vega & Comer, 2005). Much of the research that has been
conducted on workplace bullying has occurred in European and Nordic countries (Salin,
90
2008), but research in the United States is minimal (Lutgen-Sandvik et al.). Research
outside of the United States has shown that workplace bullying is a widespread
phenomenon in many countries (Birkland et al., 2008; Salin).
Researchers have suggested that increasing knowledge of power structures and
power imbalances in organizations would facilitate awareness towards the creation
organizational policies and practices designed to address organizational power
differences (Salin, 2008; Sweeney, 2007). An imbalance of power is one of the primary
characteristics of bullying (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Salin;
Sweeney). Individuals who feel inferior or incapable of defending themselves during
interaction with another become victim to the power dyad (Heames & Harvey, 2006).
One of the critical components of measuring bullying includes the perception on the part
of the target and to what extent that person feels disempowered (Hodgson et al., 2006).
have been found by researchers to create an environment that facilitates bullying (Salin,
2003c). When a power imbalance is present, the target-bully dyad structure enables
bullying. Disempowering acts and the perceptions of disempowering experiences can
lead to a negative affective response resulting in lowered self-efficacy, diminished
internal locus of control, and decreased motivation resulting in poor performance and
productivity (Young et al., 2003).
Organizational power differences are found to be related to societal power
differences, leading to bullying based on age, ethnicity, gender, job type, and work sector
(public or private) (Hoel & Cooper, 2001). In the UMIST study, individuals between the
ages of 35-44 were found to experience higher rates of exposure to workplace bullying in
91
comparison to other age groups. Occupations that traditionally revolve around
dominance, such as the prison system, law enforcement, and the medical field emulate
the power dyad during the normal interactions and relationships that occur in the
profession. According to Wrong (2004), power is present in occupations in which
competent authority exists. In the case of technology, the specialized expertise possessed
by IT professionals is often viewed as worthy of attributing status to the individual who
holds that knowledge (Freidson, 1986; Wrong).
Six hypotheses were evaluated in this study. Hypotheses were evaluated to
determine the prevalence and forms of workplace bullying as target or witness and the
perceptions of psychological empowerment based on four dimensions. An evaluation of
the existence of statistical differences between gender, job type, and work sector (public
or private) as related to frequency of workplace bullying exposure and psychological
empowerment was conducted.
factors that cause individuals to feel control in their personal lives. Personal efficacy is
perform said tasks (Conger & Kanungo, 1988). Thomas and Velthouse (1990) posited
that empowerment was a multidimensional construct comprised of four cognitions. The
work role was divided into the following four dimensions: (1) meaning, (2) competence,
(3) self-determination, and (4) impact.

92
The following hypothesis was examined to determine whether an association or
covariance exists between frequency of exposure to workplace bullying and perceptions
of psychological empowerment.
H10 There is no relationship between workplace bullying exposure and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment.
H11 There is a relationship between workplace bullying exposure and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment.
The following hypotheses were evaluated to determine the prevalence and forms
of workplace bullying as target or witness and the perceptions of psychological
empowerment based on four dimensions. An evaluation of the existence of statistical
differences between gender, job type, and work sector (public or private) as related to
perception of workplace bullying exposure and psychological empowerment was
conducted.
H20 IT professionals are not frequently exposed to workplace bullying.
H21 IT professionals are frequently exposed to workplace bullying.
H30 IT professionals will not report a higher frequency of exposure to work-
related bullying than personal bullying.
H31 IT professionals will report a higher frequency of exposure to work-related
H40 There is no statistical difference in perceptions of psychological
H41 There is a statistical difference in perceptions of psychological

93
H50 IT professionals in the executive job type will not report a lower frequency
of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who are not in the executive job
type.
H51 IT professionals in the executive job type will report a lower frequency of
type.
H60 IT professionals who work in the public work sector will not report a
higher frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work in
the private work sector.
H61 IT professionals who work in the public work sector will report a higher
private work sector.
This investigative process integrated the quantitative method, correlational design
that may provide organizations with additional knowledge that may lead to the
identification of the root causes of workplace bullying. Possible mitigation values of
psychological empowerment were identified along with administrative, public, and
legislative policies that address the issue of workplace bullying. Strategies for the overall
improvement related to reducing the negative outcomes for employees and employers
were identified.
Appropriateness of Design
A quantitative analytical approach was used to evaluate the extent to which
participants perceive exposure to workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Differences between groups related to gender, job type, work sector (public or private),
94
and form of workplace bullying were evaluated in relation to perceptions of workplace
bullying. Differences related to gender, job type, work sector (public or private), and
form of workplace bullying were evaluated in relation to perceptions of psychological
empowerment. Differences between groups were statistically evaluated using mean
scores and variance. A t test was used to determine whether the mean scores between
groups were statistically different.
A quantitative method, correlational design was used because the degree of
association between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment can be
evaluated. According to Neuman (2003), the Pearson correlation is used to determine
whether relationships exist between variables and what the magnitude or size of that
relationship is. One of the objectives of this study was to examine the extent to which
workplace bullying and psychological empowerment vary or covary, so the Pearson
correlation was an effective method for analysis. According to Creswell (2005),
covariance among variables occur when the scores from one independent or ratio level
variable can be used to predict the results of the other independent or ratio level variable.
Since the variables in this study were not expressed using rank, the Spearman correlation
statistic was not used. Table 2 details each variable as connected to the hypothesis and
instrument.
95
Table 2
Independent, Dependent and Other Variables
Hypothesis First Variable Second Variable Instrument
H1 Summed score for Summed score for NAQ-R,
workplace bullying psychological Psychological
empowerment Empowerment
Instrument
H2 Workplace bullying Frequency score for NAQ-R
workplace bullying
H3 Workplace bullying Frequency scores for NAQ-R
work-related bullying and
personal bullying
H4 Gender Summed score for Psychological
psychological Empowerment
empowerment Instrument
H5 Job Type Frequency score for NAQ-R Demographic
workplace bullying Question
H6 Work sector (public Frequency score for NAQ-R Demographic
or private) workplace bullying Question
Two validated instruments were used in the study, the Negative Acts
Questionnaire (NAQ-R) and the Psychological Empowerment Instrument to measure the

96
extent to which each participant has perceived workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment in the workplace. Since the objectives of this study involved the
measurement of frequencies, descriptive statistics and the degree of association between
variables, a qualitative approach would not have been adequate. According to Neuman
(2003), a qualitative approach should be used when subjective interpretation of collected
data is desired and a small sample that is specifically chosen is used. An objective,
quantitative approach is necessary for correlation and statistical comparison studies.
Internal Validity
According to Creswell (2005), threats to internal validity impact the extent to
which cause and effect inferences can be made. Threats typically occur during the
experimental procedure and include, but are not limited to, history, instrumentation,
maturation, regression, selection, testing and mortality. Since the study was conducted
during a single time period, the risks related to the passing of time, potential changes with
participants over time, mortality, and regression were not introduced to the study.
Compromise[s] to validity based on administration presented very low to no risk.
Two validated instruments were administered to the sample. The first instrument to be
administered was the NAQ (Einarsen et al., 1994) and the second the Psychological
Empowerment Instrument (Spreitzer, 1995). The NAQ-R has been validated to measure
perceived exposure to workplace bullying (Einarsen & Hoel, 2001) and the Psychological
Empowerment Instrument has been validated to measure psychological empowerment in
the workplace (Spreitzer, 1995; 1996).
A group of 1,500 members in an IT professional organization, the Association of
Information Technology Professionals (AITP), were offered the opportunity to participate

97
in a study about the IT workplace. Selection of participants occurred randomly using a
non-probability sampling method that involved volunteers who agreed to participate in
the study (Creswell, 2005). To prevent the possibility of introducing bias by attracting
employees who have been subjected to bullying, all forms of communication and
verbiage on the website referred to the project as The IT Workplace Survey and asked
respondents to “Tell us about your experiences in the workplace.”
External Validity
Creswell (2005) presented several key threat areas related to external validity that
impede the ability of the researcher to draw accurate inferences from the data in the
sample to that of the general population, setting, and circumstances. Interactions such as
placebo or treatment effects and those related to the inability to generalize to groups
outside the study, settings other than those found in the current study, and to historical or
future situations can affect the external validity of a research study. The presence of the
researcher in the experiment can introduce bias based on personal knowledge of the
study. This research study did not use placebo, pre or post-testing, so related bias on this
basis was minimal to non-existent. Because this study was conducted electronically, the
presence of the researcher did not present any risk.
Research Questions
The study investigated the following primary research questions: What is the
frequency and forms of workplace bullying and psychological empowerment among IT
professionals? Is there a significant relationship between workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment? Secondary research questions that addressed the
frequencies, forms and potential relationship as well as age, ethnicity, gender, job type,
and work sector effects are as follows:

98
type?
private sector?
This investigative process integrating both quantitative analysis and an
examination of critical theoretical linkages might provide organizations with additional
knowledge required to identify the root causes of workplace bullying and further the
understanding of those organizations into the nature of any relationship between
workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Population and Sampling Frame
The population for this study consisted of IT professionals in the United States.
According to Creswell (2005), “A target group (or the sampling frame) is a group of
individuals with some common defining characteristic that the research can identify and
study” (p. 146). The target population consisted of members of an IT professional
organization, the AITP, with chapters located throughout the United States, will
99
participate in the study. Permission to use the membership directory database is found in
Appendix A.
Using convenience sampling, 1,500 IT professionals were asked to participate in
the study. Based on information received from AITP, the typical response rate for survey
questionnaires conducted with members varies from 5 to 10 percent. Participants and all
members of AITP were able to review a summary of the results on the membership
website following the study. The participants were informed that the results were
provided to other researchers to further awareness and understanding in the area of
workplace issues among IT professionals. According to Creswell (2005), approximately
30 participants are required for a correlational study. The sample size selection was
deemed appropriate for the quantitative method correlational design.
Informed Consent
All members of the Association of Information Technology Professionals (AITP)
were sent an invitation via e-mail to participate in the IT Workplace Study (see Appendix
C). Clicking the survey link in the invitation e-mail took the participant to the informed
consent page (see Appendix B) of the survey located at SurveyMonkey.com. Participants
were told in the invitation that participation was voluntary and those who were not
interested in participating could simply ignore the e-mail. Participants were told that they
would not experience any unusual physical or psychological stress, nor would they
experience any risks of a social, physical or legal nature greater than that which may be
ordinarily experienced during the course of daily life, routine physical or psychological
examinations. In the event the participant had any issues, the participant was instructed to
e-mail the researcher to discuss any questions or concerns. Any questions presented by
participants via e-mail in relation to the study, associated risks, the informed consent, and
100
confidentiality were reviewed and responded to by the researcher. E-mail was stored on a
secure server in an account accessible by the researcher using username and password
authentication.
Participation of individuals was voluntary and only after each had adequate time
to review the informed consent form (see Appendix B) and agreed to the provisions
therein by clicking “Yes, I agree” which then allowed access to the survey. Clicking the
“No” option took the participant to the survey exit page. During the survey process,
participants were given the opportunity to discontinue participation at any time by
clicking an “Exit survey” link on the upper right hand side of the screen. The online
survey answers were strictly confidential and the participants remained anonymous as
guaranteed by the online survey provider, SurveyMonkey.com. In the event a participant
had an unfavorable reaction based on participating in the study, the participant was
encouraged to contact the researcher at cvpcomputing@email.phoenix.edu. The issue was
be discussed with the participant and if necessary, a suggestion was made that the
participant seek the support of a primary care physician or employee assistance program
provider.
Confidentiality
All participants were assigned a unique identifier to facilitate access to the survey,
the collection of data, and the analysis of data. No personally identifying data were
collected. The informed consent form included a statement of confidentiality (see
Appendix B) and all participants were required to sign the consent form electronically
before participating in the study. All data collected online at SurveyMonkey.com and
related forms was maintained and stored on a secure, password-protected server during
101
the study. As per the agreements between the researcher and the authors of the NAQ-R
and Psychological Empowerment Instruments, and the AITP, an electronic copy of the
data were provided to each for the purposes of furthering study into workplace bullying
and psychological empowerment.
Geographic Location
The research was conducted using an online survey on a website hosted by a
survey provider, SurveyMonkey.com, located in the United States. An assumption was
made that the online location would not have an effect on the study. According to
Neuman (2003), assumptions are a necessary starting point regarding the nature of social
realities or specific phenomena. Because the study focused on the perception of the
individual, the presumption was that external factors such as location would have little to
no influence on the results of the research study.
Instrumentation
Two validated instruments were administered to the sample for the purpose of
conducting the research study. The NAQ-R was used to assess perceived exposure to
workplace bullying (Einarsen, Raknes, Matthiesen & Hellesøy, 1994). Permission was
granted by Dr. Ståle Einarsen to use the NAQ-R in this research study (see Appendix D).
The Psychological Empowerment Instrument (Spreitzer, 1995, 1996) was used to assess
psychological empowerment in the workplace by measuring self-orientation to work role
based on four cognitive dimensions of psychological empowerment: competence, impact,
meaning, and self-determination. Permission to use the Psychological Empowerment
Instrument in the research study was granted by Dr. Gretchen Spreitzer (see Appendix E).
102
Development and Validation of the NAQ-R
The Negative Acts Questionnaire (see Appendix F) was developed and validated
by Drs. Ståle Einarsen and Helge Hoel through a series of studies and interviews with
victims of workplace bullying (Einarsen & Hoel, 2001). The original Norwegian version
was culturally adapted to an English version containing 29 items. The new version, the
NAQ-R, was used in a representative survey of 4,996 UK employees from 70 UK
companies. The response rate was reported as 43% and internal reliability was listed at
.92 as measured by Cronbach’s alpha (Einarsen & Hoel, 2001). Seven items were
removed due to low item-total correlation, leaving the NAQ-R with 22 + 1 items. The
added item appears at the end of the instrument and provides a specific definition of
bullying followed by the qualification that the definition would not apply to a one-time
isolated incident of bullying that had occurred in the last six months.
The NAQ-R identified five behavioral anchor points, ranging from never (1) to
daily (5) based on a Likert-type scale. All ranges are shown in Table 3. Although the
items are behaviorally described, there is no reference to the term bullying. According to
Einarsen (2001), there is an advantage for the respondent in not having to identify or
“label” themselves as victims of bullying and related bias is not introduced during the
questionnaire process. The scale demonstrates a high internal stability rating, ranging
from .87 to .93 as measured by Cronbach’s alpha (Einarsen et al, 1996; Mikkelsen &
Einarsen, 2001, 2002). Factor analysis revealed two factors for the NAQ; personal
bullying, consisting of 12 items related to being exposed to insults, teasing, and personal
criticism; and work-related bullying, consisting of 8 items related to being exposed to

103
behaviors such as excessive oversight, unmanageable workloads, and having valuable
information withheld.
Internal reliability for each factor was reported as .87 and .81, respectively
(Einarsen & Hoel, 2001). Construct validity was demonstrated in extant theoretical
literature showing bullying to be a factor related to work stress. Studies have also shown
that the NAQ correlates with measures of job satisfaction in the range of r = -.24 to r = -
.44. The scale correlates with measures of psychosomatic complaints at r = .32 and
overall psychological health and well being in the range of r = -.31 to -.52 (Einarsen &
Hoel, 2001; Einarsen et al., 1994).
Table 3
NAQ-R Behavioral Anchor Points
Numerical rating Behavioral anchor point
1 Never
2 Now and then
3 Monthly
4 Weekly
5 Daily
104
Development and Validation of the Psychological Empowerment Instrument
The 12-item Psychological Empowerment Instrument (see Appendix G) was
developed and validated by Dr. Gretchen Spreitzer. Based on Thomas and Velthouse’s
theoretical framework of empowerment, the instrument was designed to measure four
cognitive dimensions of psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-
determination, and impact (1990). Meaning involves the congruence between behavior,
ones beliefs, values and the role served at work as a mechanism for creating a purposeful
goal-oriented work ethic. Competence is the belief in one’s ability to accomplish the
work task. Self-determination is the belief that one has the option of engaging in actions
to accomplish a goal in the workplace. Influence is the belief that what one does matters
and can influence the goals and objectives of an organization.
The instrument has been used on more than 50 different studies in numerous
working environments. According to Spreitzer (1995, 1996), test-retest reliability was
considered strong and validity for the cognitive dimensions of psychological
empowerment was about .80. Construct validity was assessed using a primary sample of
393 mid-level managerial employees from an industrial organization. The primary
sample was randomly selected and all work units from within the organization were
represented to ensure a diverse sample. A secondary sample of 128 employees was
selected using a stratified random sampling technique consisting of team membership and
function within the team. In order to ensure discriminant validity, separate scales were
used for each cognitive dimension (Spreitzer, 1995). The factor analyses demonstrated
that the four dimensions contributed to an overall construct of psychological
empowerment (Spreitzer, 1995). Internal consistency ranges from .62 to .74 for the total
105
scale and from .79 to .85 for the subscales. The sum of items on the subscale provides the
subscale score and the total scale score is derived using the average of the subscale
scores. Higher scores indicate higher perceptions of empowerment.
The Psychological Empowerment Instrument identified seven behavioral anchor
points ranging from very strongly disagree (A) to very strongly agree (G) based on a
Likert scale. All ranges are shown in Table 4.
Table 4
Psychological Empowerment Instrument Behavioral Anchor Points
Alphanumeric rating Behavioral anchor point
A Very strongly disagree
B Strongly disagree
C Disagree
D Neutral
E Agree
F Strongly agree
G Very strongly agree
Data Collection
The Internet was used as the means of collecting the data and study participants
were contacted by e-mail to begin the completion of the online survey through a
password-protected site. All individuals had an 8-week period within which to complete
the survey. Internet-based surveys are advantageous due to the speed and ease of data
collection (Granello & Wheaton, 2004). All data entered into the online survey were
106
electronically collected and stored in Excel spreadsheet files located in a secure file
storage area on the server. Data from the Excel spreadsheets were imported into SPSS
version 16.0 for analysis. SPSS was used to perform all data analyses and statistical
procedures, including calculation of frequencies, descriptive statistics, analysis of
variance (ANOVA), t-tests, and Pearson r correlations. In order to encourage completion
of the online survey, the researcher wanted to send participants an e-mail reminder to
complete the survey within the designated timeframe. However, AITP did not want to
risk annoying members, so the reminder e-mail was not sent.
Data Analysis
Data collected from the electronic survey were entered into Excel upon the
respondent submitting the electronic form. The data were imported from Excel into SPSS
version 16 to perform the analysis of summary statistics including frequencies, means,
and standard deviations. Inferential statistics such as t tests and Pearson r correlation
were also performed using the SPSS statistical software. The independent-samples t test
is used by researchers to compare the mean score, on a continuous variable for two
different groups of subjects (Creswell, 2005).
Differences in overall psychological scores between groups related to gender were
evaluated using the two-tailed t test. The proposed level of significance was 95%.
Statistical analyses of the data involved the Pearson r correlation to examine whether a
relationship existed between workplace bullying exposure and psychological
empowerment. The Pearson r correlation was used instead of Spearman rho because
parametric analysis of variables was used. An independent sample, two-tailed t test and
Pearson r correlation were the primary statistical methods used for testing the hypotheses
of the study. Frequencies were determined for hypotheses related to frequency.

107
Summary
bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. This research
study also investigated differences in workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment scores based on gender, job type, and work sector (public or private).
Members of the Association of Information Technology Professionals participated in the
study.
This investigative process integrating both quantitative analysis and an
examination of critical theoretical linkages might provide organizations with additional
knowledge. This information may identify the root causes of workplace bullying and
further the understanding of those organizations into the nature of any relationship
between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Conclusion
Chapter 3 detailed the methodology used in the research study, further detailed
the research hypotheses and questions, described potential threats to internal and external
validity, and detailed the procedure for data collection and subsequent analysis. Chapter 4
provides all data generated from the study, the specific steps taken to address missing
data and outliers, and an analysis of the data complete with figures and tables for
illustrative purposes.
108
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which a relationship between
workplace bullying and psychological empowerment exists among IT professionals and
the degree of association between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
This research also looked at how often workplace bullying occurs and in what forms, and
the extent to which IT professionals perceive themselves on four dimensions of
psychological empowerment. Independent variables were workplace bullying, gender,
job type, and work sector (public or private); the dependent variables were psychological
The following research questions were used as a basis for this investigation:
1. What is the relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
2. How frequently are IT professionals exposed to workplace bullying?
3. What forms of workplace bullying are IT professionals exposed to?
4. How do male IT professionals differ from females in terms of perceiving
5. Do IT professionals in the executive job type perceive less frequent exposure
to workplace bullying than IT professionals who are not in the executive job
type?
109
6. Do IT professionals who work in the public sector report a higher frequency
of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work in the
private sector?
The study made the following hypotheses:
1. There is a relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
2. IT professionals are frequently exposed to workplace bullying.
3. IT professionals will report a higher frequency of exposure to work-related
4. There is a statistical difference in perceptions of psychological empowerment
between male and female IT professionals.
5. IT professionals in the executive job type will report a lower frequency of
exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who are not in the
executive job type.
6. IT professionals who work in the public work sector will report a higher
frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work
in the private work sector.
Research Design and Method
The quantitative correlational design evaluated the degree of association between
work-related and personal forms of workplace bullying and four dimensions of
psychological empowerment. The research study also evaluated the relationship between
an overall summed score of workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
Direction and strength of the relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
110
empowerment was determined using the Pearson r correlation (Neuman, 2005). The
correlational design was appropriate for this study because the approach effectively
evaluated the extent of the association between variables and the strength of the
association using Pearson r correlation (Creswell, 2005). A two-tailed t test was also used
to determine whether gender differences exist and the means of each group were
statistically different from each other in perception of psychological empowerment.
Levene’s test was used to assess the equality of variance of different groups. Frequency
counts and percentages for each of the NAQ-R questions were calculated to determine
the frequency or prevalence of different forms of workplace bullying and workplace
bullying overall. Descriptive statistics and frequencies for socio-demographic variables
were calculated to determine the different groups of respondents based on age, gender,
ethnicity, and job type.
Data Collection Procedures
Two validated questionnaires were used to gather the information needed to
conduct the study. According to Creswell (2005), the choice of survey instrument on the
part of the researcher is important. Using instruments that are standardized and have
demonstrated adequate validity and reliability is recommended. The Negative Acts
Questionnaire (NAQ-R) was used to measure perceived exposure to bullying and
victimization at work (Einarsen, Raknes, Matthiesen & Hellesøy, 1994). Participants
were provided with an online questionnaire list of 22 behaviorally-defined negative acts
that have been associated with workplace bullying and asked to select the number that
best corresponds to perception of exposure to negative acts over the last six months. A
Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Daily) was used. Workplace bullying was
111
also be measured using a subjective method in which participants are provided with a
specific definition of workplace bullying and asked to respond or self-identify as to
perception of being exposed to workplace bullying as target or as witness over specific
periods within the last six months.
A second instrument, the Psychological Empowerment Instrument, developed by
Spreitzer (1995), was used to measure four dimensions of psychological empowerment as
related to self-orientations that people may have with regard to work role. This Likert-
type scale ranges from “A. Very Strongly Disagree” to “G. Very Strongly Agree.” The
statistical results between the NAQ and the Psychological Empowerment Instrument
were used to provide an indication as to whether perception of workplace bullying is
related to perception of psychological empowerment.
Data collection was conducted during an 8-week period using an online survey
made available on a secure website. An invitation e-mail was sent to members of
Association for Information Technology Professionals (AITP) which has chapters located
throughout the United States. Upon responding to the e-mail invitation using a link,
participants were presented with an Informed Consent form and after electronically
signing, were taken to the questionnaire. All responses were electronically collected and
stored in an Excel spreadsheet file located in a secure file storage area on the server. Data
were imported into SPSS for data analysis and statistical procedures including calculation
of frequencies, descriptive statistics, t-test, Levene’s test, and Pearson r correlation.
Missing Data
According to Neuman (2003), missing data can have an impact on the reliability
and validity of a study. The data collected were reviewed by the researcher and cleaned
112
of any records in which missing data were found. Thirty eight survey response sets out of
fifty five were found to be complete. All of the records containing missing data had the
demographics section filled out. The demographics section preceded the questions related
to negative acts associated with bullying. Missing data is not unexpected since Creswell
(2002) stated that respondents may find certain questions too sensitive to respond to and
in some cases; respondents may exit the survey without completing as a result.
Number of Participants
Fifteen hundred invitations were sent out to the members of the Association of
Information Technology Professionals (AITP) and fifty-five respondents started the
questionnaire after electronically signing the informed consent document. Thirty-eight
response sets were completed and therefore able to be analyzed, representing an overall
response rate of 2.5%. According to Creswell (2002), the sample size should be such that
the there is similarity with the population. A minimum of 30 participants are required for
studies involving correlation (Creswell).
Sample and Demographics
The frequency counts and percentages for the sample demographics are presented
in Tables 5. Age of respondents varied from between 28 to 76 and the highest percentage
of respondents were from the age range of between 50 and 65 (73.8%). There were more
males who participated in this study than females. A considerable percentage were
married (73.7%), few were divorced/separated (5.3%), one tenth (10.5%) were widowed,
very few were single (2.6%), and the rest (7.9%) were living with a domestic partner.
Almost half (47.4%) of the participants had an undergraduate degree, (39.5%) had a
masters degree, high school (5.3%) and trade school (5.3%), and a small number had
113
fulfilled a doctorate degree (2.6%). Caucasians (94.7%) dominated the participants while
the rest were divided equally as African American (2.6%) and Pacific Islander (2.6%).
Respondents held varied positions such as application development (23.7%), liaison and
coordination (7.9%), systems programming (5.3%), technical consultants (21.1%),
technical management (26.3%), and lastly as executives (15.8%). Most of the participants
reported as working full time (92.1%) and (71.1%) reported working in the private sector.
Almost half (44.7%) of the respondents reported having more than 1000 employees in
their workplace, (23.7%) of the respondents reporting having less than 25 employees in
the workplace, (13.2%) of the respondents reporting having between 101-500 employees
in the workplace, (10.5%) of respondents reported having between 500-1000 employees
in the workplace, and (7.9%) of respondents reported having between 26-100 employees
in the workplace.
Table 5
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Age Variable (N = 38)
Variable Frequency Percentage
Age
28-49 7 18.2
50-65 28 73.8
66-76 3 7.8
114
Table 6
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Gender Variable (N = 38)
Gender
Male 28 73.7
Female 10 26.3
Table 7
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Marital Status Variable (N = 38)
Marital Status
Married 28 73.7
Divorced/separated 2 5.3
Widowed 4 10.5
Single, never married 1 2.6
Other/Living With Domestic 3 7.9
Partner
115
Table 8
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Education Variable (N = 38)
Highest Educational Attainment
High school 2 5.3
Trade school/college 2 5.3
Undergraduate degree 18 47.4
Masters degree 15 39.5
Doctorate 1 2.6
Table 9
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Ethnicity Variable (N = 38)
Ethnicity
African American 1 2.6
Caucasian/White 36 94.7
Pacific Islander/Hawaiian 1 2.6

116
Table 10
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Job Type Variable (N = 38)
Job Type
Application development 9 23.7
Liaison and coordination 3 7.9
Systems programming 2 5.3
Technical consultants 8 21.1
Technical management 10 26.3
Executive 6 15.8
Table 11
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Employment Status Variable (N = 38)
Employment Status
Full-time 35 92.1
Part-time 3 7.9
117
Table 12
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Organization Type Variable (N = 38)
Organization Type
Public 11 28.9
Private 27 71.1
Table 13
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Employees in Workplace Variable (N = 38)
Number of Employees
Less than 25 9 23.7
Between 26-100 3 7.9
Between 101-500 5 13.2
Between 500-1000 4 10.5
More than 1000 17 44.7

118
Data Analysis Procedures
Collected data were carefully checked to ensure that all questions were
completely answered. Incomplete responses were omitted from the analysis for purposes
of consistency and higher integrity of data. Questions found on the Negative Acts
Questionnaire and response frequencies and percentages are summarized and presented in
Appendix J. Based on the data, NAQ3 (Being ordered to do work below your level of
competence), NAQ16 (Being given tasks with unreasonable or impossible targets or
deadlines), and NAQ21 (Being exposed to an unmanageable workload) were reported as
occurring on a daily basis. NAQ1 (Someone withholding information which affects your
performance), NAQ8 (Being shouted at or being the target of spontaneous anger (or
rage)), NAQ11 (Repeated reminders of your errors or mistakes), NAQ13 (Persistent
criticism of your work and effort), and NAQ14 (Having your opinions and views
ignored), were reported as occurring on a weekly basis.
Responses on the Negative Acts Questionnaire were also evaluated to determine
the degree of workplace bullying reported by each respondent. This is determined by
adding the total of intensity, frequency, and duration measures. The cumulative intensity
score was derived by summing the total number of reported negative acts (Lutgen-
Sandvik et al., 2007). Frequency scores were calculated by adding the total number of
negative acts occurring on a daily or weekly basis (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007). All
respondents in the current study had duration scores of 6 since the NAQ asks about
negative acts over the past six months (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007). Appendix K
presents the bullying degree score of each respondent.

119
Using SPSS version 16 software to perform the data analysis, the following
statistical tests were conducted to assess the hypotheses and answer research questions
raised in this study. For all analyses, the p-value was set at p < 0.05, which provided a
95% certainty that the relationships between variables did not occur by chance. The p-
value is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis accurately (Creswell, 2005).
Pearson r correlation test was used in order to determine the strength of relationship
between variables workplace bullying and psychological empowerment and an
independent samples two-tailed t-test was utilized to assess whether the means of groups
were statistically different from each other. Levene’s test was also used to determine the
equality of variance for each group tested using the t-test.
The methods of statistical analyses were deemed most appropriate for this
research study based on sample size and population. The decision not to use the chi-
square statistic was based on the fact that there were not enough data cells present to run
the test correctly. A chi-square requires two or more independent and dependent variables
and a non-normal distribution of scores (Creswell, 2005). An ANOVA was not conducted
because there were only two groups in the study and the data values were constant and
non-changing throughout the study. The ANOVA is based on the fact that two
independent estimates of the population variance can be obtained from the sample data.
In the case of all hypotheses for this study, there were no between- or within-groups
analyses that needed to be conducted (Creswell). Results based on the chosen methods of
analyses are presented in the succeeding section of this chapter.

120
Test of Hypotheses/Findings
Hypothesis 1: There is a relationship between workplace bullying and psychological
Correlations among Workplace Bullying and Psychological Empowerment
The correlations between the different forms of bullying and the dimensions of
psychological empowerment are shown in Table 14. The different forms of bullying
include personal bullying and work-related bullying, based on corresponding questions
from the NAQ-R. Overall workplace bullying is a summed score of work-related and
personal bullying. This part of the analysis was conducted to determine which aspect of
bullying has a stronger relationship with psychological empowerment. Four dimensions
of psychological empowerment (competence, impact, meaning and self-determination),
were used to determine which dimension has a relationship with bullying behavior. Each
question on the Psychological Empowerment Instrument is associated with a dimension
based on factor analysis conducted by the author of the instrument (Spreitzer, 1995).
Summed scores for each of four dimensions were added together to determine the overall
psychological empowerment summed score and were used to perform a correlation with
the summed scores for two different forms of bullying (personal and work-related) and a
summed score of workplace bullying overall. A bivariate or Pearson product moment
correlation was performed to determine the nature and direction of relationship between
the variables of workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. Correlation
coefficient, r, varies between 0 (no relationship) and 1 (perfect positive linear
relationship) or -1 (perfect negative linear relationship) (Creswell, 2005). In the case of
the positive relationship, as one variable increases, so does the other variable. In the case
121
of a negative relationship, an inverse relationship exists, wherein the increase on one
variable occurs, decreasing the other variable. The correlation is performed to allow
prediction of one variable based on the extent of co-variance and information known
about another variable (Creswell).
The competence dimension of psychological empowerment was weakly
associated with work-related and personal forms of workplace bullying and workplace
bullying overall with Pearson r scores of -.210, -.075, and -.154, respectively. The
meaning dimension of psychological empowerment was weakly associated with work-
related and personal forms of workplace bullying and workplace bullying overall with
Pearson r scores of -.188, -.138, and -.174, respectively. The impact dimension was
negatively correlated to both workplace bullying overall and highly negatively correlated
to work-related bullying with Pearson r scores of -.396 and -.420, respectively. The self-
determination dimension was highly negatively correlated to both work-related and
personal forms of workplace bullying and workplace bullying overall with Pearson r
scores of -.536, -.422 and -.510, respectively. Overall, psychological empowerment was
negatively correlated to workplace bullying overall and work-related bullying
specifically, but not significantly correlated to personal bullying. As a result of the data
analysis, the null hypothesis is rejected.

122
Table 14
Correlations among Workplace Bullying and Psychological Empowerment
Work-
Personal related
Correlations Overall bullying bullying
Competence Pearson Correlation -.154 -.075 -.210

Sig. (2-tailed) .355 .656 .205
N 38 38 38
Impact Pearson Correlation -.396* -.322 -.420**

Sig. (2-tailed) .014 .048 .009
N 38 38 38
Meaning Pearson Correlation -.174 -.138 -.188

Sig. (2-tailed) .296 .408 .259
N 38 38 38
Self-Determination Pearson Correlation -.510** -.422** -.536**

Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .008 .001
N 38 38 38
Psychological Pearson Correlation -.428** -.338 -.463*

Empowerment Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .038 .003
N 38 38 38
*-Correlation is significant at the .05 level (two-tailed)
**-Correlation is significant at the .01 level (two-tailed)
Hypothesis 2: IT professionals are frequently exposed to workplace bullying.
Exposure to Workplace Bullying
Frequencies of exposure to negative acts associated with personal and work-
related forms of bullying and whether respondents self-identified as bullied or having
witnessed the bullying of co-workers were also determined. Table 15 shows the
frequency counts and percentages of respondents who were exposed to a specified count
123
of negative acts on a weekly or daily basis. Out of 38 respondents, 8 (21%) reported
being exposed to negative acts associated with workplace bullying on a daily or weekly
basis; 4 (50%) of which reported being exposed to 1 negative act on a daily or weekly
basis; 1 (12.5%) of which reported being exposed to 2 negative acts on a daily or weekly
basis; 2 (25%) of which reported being exposed to 3 negative acts on a daily or weekly
basis, and 1 (12.5%) of which reported being exposed to 4 negative acts on a daily or
weekly basis. Out of 38 respondents, 3 (8%) self-identified as bullied and 10 (26%)
reported witnessing other employees being bullied. As a result of the data analysis, the
null hypothesis is not rejected.
Table 15
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Negative Acts Exposure (N = 38)
Negative Act Exposure
1 Negative Act Wkly/Daily 4 50
2 Negative Acts Wkly/Daily 1 12.5
3 Negative Acts Wkly/Daily 2 25
4 Negative Acts Wkly/Daily 1 12.5
Overall Weekly/Daily Exposure 8 21

124
Comparison of two measures of workplace bullying
In extant literature, two primary methods for measuring perceived exposure to
workplace bullying include the use of a behaviorally-defined list of negative acts
associated with workplace bullying and single-item questions that permit the respondent
to read a definition of bullying and self-identify as bullied or witness to workplace
bullying. A comparison between responses for those who identified as target using the
NAQ was performed to determine whether responses were similar. As stated earlier, 8
(21%) respondents were identified as having been exposed to one ore more negative acts
associated with workplace bullying on a weekly or daily basis. Out of the 8 respondents,
only 1 self-identified as bullied on the single item question. Out of the 8 respondents, 2
self-identified as witness to others being bullied. The correlations between these two
methods as used in this study to measure perceived exposure to workplace bullying are
presented in Table 16.
Table 16
Correlations among Responses for Two Measures of Workplace Bullying (N = 8)
Correlations Overall
Bullied Pearson Correlation .653

Sig. (2-tailed) .079
N 8
Witness Pearson Correlation .710*

Sig. (2-tailed) .048
N 8
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

125
Perceptions on the frequency of exposure to workplace bullying based on
negative acts associated with workplace bullying and self-identification as bullied were
not correlated. This implies that the respondents may not want to self-identify as bullied
when the definition of bullying is used. Questions on the NAQ, which included
descriptions of behaviorally-defined negative acts associated with workplace bullying,
did not include the term, bullied, thereby preventing the respondent from having to label
themselves as bullied.
Hypothesis 3: IT professionals will report a higher frequency of exposure to work-related
Descriptive Statistics on Frequency of Workplace Bullying Exposure by Form
Two forms of bullying as defined by the underlying factors of the NAQ are
personal bullying and work-related bullying. Respondents who met the criteria for being
a target of workplace bullying were identified by counting the number of negative acts in
which the respondent rated themselves as being exposed on a weekly (4) or daily (5)
basis. 8 respondents were exposed to at least one negative act associated with workplace
bullying. Frequency ratings were calculated by counting the total number of negative acts
associated with workplace bullying for each form (work-related and personal). The total
count of negative acts experienced was 16, of which 13 (81%) were work-related and of
which 3 (19%) were personal. Frequency counts and percentages for forms of workplace
bullying exposure are presented in Table 17. As a result of the data analysis, the null
hypothesis is rejected.
126
Table 17
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Forms of Workplace Bullying Exposure (N = 8)
Form of Workplace Bullying
Work-Related 13 81%
Personal 3 19%
Overall Weekly/Daily Exposure 16 100%
Hypothesis 4: There is a statistical difference in perceptions of psychological
This hypothesis was analyzed using the t-test statistic to determine the extent to
which there is a statistical difference in perception of psychological empowerment
between two groups: male and female IT professionals. According to Creswell (2005),
the t-test should be used when a categorical independent variable (gender) is being
measured against a continuous dependent variable (psychological empowerment)
assuming a normal distribution. The data being tested must have means and standard
deviations to allow a t-test to be performed. The comparison was performed using the
summed scores from the Psychological Empowerment Instrument because that score
represents the extent to which the respondent perceives psychological empowerment.

127
T-test Results on the Gender Differences in Perceiving Psychological Empowerment
T-test results on gender differences in perception of psychological empowerment
are presented in Table 18. Levene's test for equality of variances was conducted and the
results are presented in Table 19. The results of the t-test show that there is no statistical
difference in perceptions of psychological empowerment between genders exists among
IT professionals. Based on the findings, male and female IT professionals are assumed to
equally vary in perception of psychological empowerment. As a result of the data
analysis, the null hypothesis is not rejected.
Table 18
T-test Results on Gender Differences in Perceiving Psychological Empowerment
T-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Sig. Mean Std. Error

t df (2-tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
Competence .347 36 .731 .371 1.07 -1.80 2.54
Impact .111 36 .912 .186 1.67 -3.20 3.57
Meaning -.376 36 .709 -.450 1.19 -2.88 1.98
Self- .465 36 .645 .836 1.79 -2.80 4.48

Determination
Psychological .206 36 .838 .235 1.143 -2.083 2.555

Empowerment
128
Table 19
Results of Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances for Gender Differences in Perceiving
Psychological Empowerment
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
Variable F Sig. Distribution
Competence .617 .437 Equal variances

assumed
Impact 1.011 .321 Equal variances

assumed
Meaning 1.985 .167 Equal variances

assumed
Self- .090 .766 Equal variances

Determination assumed
Psychological .636 .431 Equal variances

Empowerment assumed
All the scores of the dimensions of psychological empowerment, along with the
overall psychological empowerment, were not influenced by gender differences since
there was no sufficient evidence to state that gender differences significantly affect the
outcome of the responses for psychological empowerment.
Hypothesis 5: IT professionals in the executive job type will report a lower frequency of
type.
129
Descriptive Statistics on Frequency of Workplace Bullying Exposure by Job Type
IT professionals were asked to identify the job type of their current position in the
workplace. For the purpose of the analysis, respondents were grouped in either the
executive or non-executive job type based their response to the related demographics
question. Respondents who met the criteria for being a target of workplace bullying were
identified by counting the number of negative acts in which the respondent rated
themselves as being exposed on a weekly (4) or daily (5) basis. A total of 8 respondents
were exposed to at least one negative act associated with workplace bullying. Frequency
ratings were calculated by counting the total number of negative acts associated with
workplace bullying. The total count of negative acts experienced was 16, of which 4
(25%) were reported by respondents in the executive job type and of which 12 (75%)
were reported by respondents in the non-executive job type. Frequency counts and
percentages for exposure to workplace bullying exposure by job type are presented in
Table 20. IT professionals working in the executive job type reported a lower frequency
of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work in non-executive job
types. These findings provide support for the hypothesis; therefore the null hypothesis is
rejected.
130
Table 20
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Bullying Exposure by Job Type (N = 8)
Job Type
Executive 4 25%
Non-Executive 12 75%
Hypothesis 6: IT professionals who work in the public sector will report a higher
private sector.
Descriptive Statistics on Frequency of Workplace Bullying Exposure by Work Sector
IT professionals were asked to identify the work sector in which they are
currently employed on the demographics section of the questionnaire. Respondents who
met the criteria for being a target of workplace bullying were identified by counting the
number of negative acts in which the respondent rated themselves as being exposed on a
weekly (4) or daily (5) basis. 8 respondents were exposed to at least one negative act
associated with workplace bullying. Frequency ratings were calculated by counting the
total number of negative acts associated with workplace bullying. The total count of
negative acts experienced was 16, of which 7 (44%) were reported by respondents in the
public work sector and of which 9 (56%) were reported by respondents in the private
131
sector. Frequency counts and percentages for exposure to workplace bullying exposure
by work sector are presented in Table 21. IT professionals working in the public sector
reported a lower frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who
work in the private. These findings do not provide support for the hypothesis; therefore
the null hypothesis is accepted.
Table 21
Frequency Counts and Percentages for Bullying Exposure by Work Sector (N = 8)
Work Sector
Public 7 44%
Private 9 56%
Type I and Type II Errors
According to Creswell (2005), research problems that occur due to Type I or Type
II errors need to be recognized as having implications on the study findings. A limitation
of this study includes the fact that the study was based on one organization’s members
and the sample size was relatively small. The small sample size increased the likelihood
of making a Type I error, which means that the researcher rejects the null hypothesis
when it is true and should be accepted. Type II errors occur when the researcher fails to
reject the null hypothesis when an effect is present (Creswell). The implication of making
a Type II error is that the goal of better understanding the research problem is not met.
132
Consequently, the value of the conclusion is misrepresented and the accuracy of
perception of reality is distorted. The situation has implications on the focus of future
research efforts in that future hypotheses may be modified as a result of findings of the
present study in which the Type II error occurred. Rejecting a false null hypothesis when
appropriate increases the power of the outcome of the hypothesis testing process
(Creswell).
Summary of Findings
Chapter 4 presented the research findings and results of data collected using a
secure survey questionnaire hosted on SurveyMonkey.com. The chapter also included a
review of the research design and methods, data collection procedures, data analysis,
details on instruments used, and demographics of participants. Statistical methods used
for the study included frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations, the t test,
Levene’s test, and Pearson r correlations.
bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. The goal of this
research study was to look at how often workplace bullying occurs and in what forms,
and the extent to which IT professionals perceive themselves on four dimensions of

133
The findings indicate that overall psychological empowerment was negatively
correlated to overall and work-related bullying but not correlated to personal bullying.
While the self-determination dimension was highly negatively correlated to all three
forms of workplace bullying, the impact dimension was only negatively correlated to
overall and work-related bullying. The competence and meaning dimensions were not
correlated to any of the forms of workplace bullying.
With regards to the frequency of workplace bullying, the responses indicate that
IT professionals are experiencing workplace bullying frequently. For the forms of
workplace bullying, work-related bullying was perceived significantly more compared to
personal bullying. Gender differences were also found to be not important in the
perception of psychological empowerment. Executives reported less frequent exposure to
workplace bullying than non-executives. Work sector differences were not significant in
terms of the perception of workplace bullying.
An overview of all previous chapters and an interpretation of the data and related
results are presented in Chapter 5. The significance to research on workplace bullying,
implications for leadership and limitations of the study are presented. Chapter 5 also
discusses recommendations for future research on the topics of workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment among IT professionals.

134
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
research study was to look at how often workplace bullying occurs and in what forms,
and the extent to which IT professionals perceive themselves on four dimensions of
empowerment and workplace bullying. Chapter 5 summarizes each of the previous
chapters, and discusses the findings and interpretations, study design considerations, the
implications for leadership, and recommendations for future research.
Chapter 1 introduced the topic of workplace bullying, provided the background of
the problem, purpose and significance of the study, theoretical framework, and definition
of terms. Researchers have found that workplace bullying has negative consequences on
the health, well-being, and economic welfare of individuals and families as well as the
climate and business interests of organizations (LeVan & Martin, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik
et al.; Namie, 2007; Strandmark & Hallberg, 2007; Vega & Comer, 2005). Increasing
awareness of workplace bullying could permit organizations to improve the workplace
environment by lessening or eliminating the negative outcomes associated with
workplace bullying. Knowledge acquired during this study reiterates the need for
additional research to be conducted on work environments that possess risk factors that
lead to workplace bullying and disempowerment in the organization.

135
Chapter 2 included a comprehensive review of relevant extant literature on
historical and current views on workplace bullying and psychological empowerment from
multiple perspectives. Based on the extensive literature review that included journal
articles from EBSCOhost, ProQuest, Questia, and numerous books and the information
obtained therein, workplace bullying was found to be an ongoing phenomenon involving
power imbalances and abuse of power structures both vertically and horizontally. The
goal of the literature review was to gain a significant background on the behavioral and
structural dynamics that occur in workplace bullying and psychological empowerment.
The literature indicated that increasing awareness within the organization as to the direct
and indirect costs of workplace bullying and disempowerment of the workforce may
serve as an impetus for the creation of new or redesigned policies that will address the
problem as part of a strategic plan.
Chapter 3 detailed the research design and method, hypotheses and research
questions, and information about the population and sampling frame. This quantitative
correlational study evaluated the frequency of workplace bullying among IT
professionals overall and frequencies related to form of bullying (work-related or
personal), job type (executive or non-executive) and work sector (public or private). The
degree of association between each of four cognitive dimensions associated with
psychological empowerment and workplace bullying was assessed using Pearson r
correlations. A frequency analysis was conducted to determine if there are any particular
groups at risk for workplace bullying that are based on job type (executive or non-
executive) and work sector (public or private). Independent t tests were used to determine
if differences related to gender exists in the perception of psychological empowerment.

136
Chapter 4 provided information about data collection procedures, statistical
analysis methods, tests of hypotheses, and a report of findings. Missing data and the
response rate were discussed. Descriptive and inferential data were presented using
various tables throughout the chapter.
Chapter 5 provides a detailed discussion and interpretation of the results of the
study and the theoretical framework connection to the extensive literature review. Social
exchange theory, the theoretical framework of the dissertation was supported from
several applicable areas. Social exchange theory involves power dynamics in the
dependence and interdependence of actors. From an organizational perspective,
technology plays a supportive role in maximizing core competencies and creating a
dependence on those IT professionals who possess the skills necessary to implement
enabling technologies. The alignment between IT and organizational goals needs to be
facilitated through psychological empowerment, rather than workplace bullying. By
further investigating dynamics of the IT workplace through continued research,
leadership can become increasingly aware as to the implications of workplace bullying
and the direct and indirect benefits of integrating psychological empowerment into the
organizational culture. Recommendations for future research conclude the dissertation.
Discussion Overview
bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. This research also
examined how often workplace bullying occurs and in what forms, and the extent to
which IT professionals perceive themselves on four dimensions of psychological

137
empowerment. It was hypothesized that IT professionals were frequently exposed to
workplace bullying and that a relationship existed between workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. Although the results of the
study did not determine that a statistically significant difference between genders was
present in the perception of psychological empowerment, the literature reviewed does
provide support for gender differences in workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment. The following section details each hypothesis and discussions related to
the findings and interpretation.
Findings and Interpretation
Two sets of hypotheses consisting of null and alternate hypotheses were presented
in the current research study. Six research questions were presented in the current study.
Question 1 inquired as to whether or not a relationship exists between workplace bullying
and psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. Question 2 inquired about
how frequent IT professionals are exposed to workplace bullying. Question 3 inquired as
to what forms of workplace bullying IT professionals are exposed to. Question 4 inquired
as to whether male IT professionals differ from female IT professionals in terms of
perceiving psychological empowerment. Question 5 inquired whether IT professionals in
the executive job type perceive less frequent exposure to workplace bullying than IT
professionals who are not in the executive job type. Question 6 research question inquired
whether IT professionals who work in the public sector report a higher frequency of
exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who work in the private sector.
138
Hypothesis 1
The H1 null hypothesis (H1 ) was tested by computing a correlation coefficient

0
and analyzing the coefficient to ascertain the existence of any linear relationship between
the variables. The results of the data analysis revealed a statistically significant negative
correlation between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. A statistically
significant negative correlation between the work-related form of workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment was also determined to exist. The results of the data analysis
revealed a statistically significant negative correlation between workplace bullying and
the impact dimension of psychological empowerment. A statistically significant negative
correlation between the work-related form of workplace bullying and psychological
empowerment was also determined to exist. The correlation was significant at the .05
level and justified rejecting H1 which stated that a correlation does not exist between
0
workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. When a correlation is found to be
significant at the .05 level, the research hypothesis is considered accepted and the null
hypothesis rejected with a 5% chance of making this rejection in error.
A statistically significant negative correlation between the work-related form of
workplace bullying and the impact dimension of psychological empowerment was also
determined to exist. The results of the data analysis revealed a statistically significant
negative correlation between workplace bullying, the personal and work-related forms of
workplace bullying specifically and the self-determination dimension of psychological
empowerment. The correlation was significant at the .01 level and justified rejecting H1
0
which stated that a correlation does not exist between workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment. When a correlation is found to be significant at the .01

139
level, the research hypothesis is considered accepted and the null hypothesis rejected with
a 1% chance of making this rejection in error.
The results obtained for Hypothesis 1 are congruent with the research literature
which indicates that workplace bullying creates a work environment that creates a sense
of powerlessless or feelings of disempowerment, and the inability to maintain a cognitive
orientation based upon the four dimensions in cognition of psychological empowerment:
(a) meaning, (b), competence, (c) self-determination, and (d) influence (Thomas &
Velthouse, 1990). The implications of this finding are that workers who feel empowered
on a personal level tend to actively engage in the work environment, whereas workers
who feel isolated tend to disengage from the work environment. Workers who actively
engage in the work environment are more productive than workers who disengage from
the work environment. The isolation that comes with workplace bullying also serves to
contribute to the feelings of disempowerment and disconnectedness with the work
environment and the meaning of the work performed and the extent to which one feels
they have an impact over what happens in the workplace decreases as a result. Self-
determination decreases for the target because a sense of helplessness, immense sadness
and loneliness develops as repeated bullying is experienced over time. Workers become
more anxious and depressed and begin to feel less competent in their ability to make
decisions and perform work tasks correctly.
Hypothesis 2
The findings of the study indicate that 21% of the IT professionals surveyed had
been exposed to workplace bullying on a weekly or daily basis over the last 6 months.
Although IT professionals have never been investigated before in extant literature on

140
workplace bullying, this percentage-based finding is similar to results reported in existing
literature for various work sectors in the United States and Europe. A review of the
literature that surveyed 30 various studies on workplace bullying concluded,
“Between 1-4% of employees may experience serious bullying, and between 8-
10% occasional bullying. Between 10 and 20 percent (or even higher) of
employees may occasionally be confronted with negative social behavior at work
which does not correspond to definitions of bullying but which is stressful for the
persons concerned nevertheless” (Zapf et al., 2003, p. 121).
The implication of this finding is that workplace bullying is prevalent in various work
environments which makes the case for more intervention and prevention programs to be
utilized in the workplace. The positive effects of a bullying-free workplace far outweigh
the negative impact of permitting the bullying-prone workplace to persevere. In gaining
awareness of the problem within an organization or work sector, solutions can be
developed to eliminate the existence of workplace bullying thereby allowing the
organization or work sector to benefit from a workplace bullying free environment.
Hypothesis 3
The findings of the study indicate that there is a higher frequency of exposure to
work-related bullying than personal bullying. The NAQ questions that are factored under
work-related bullying include: NAQ1 (Someone withholding information which affects
your performance); NAQ3 (Being ordered to do work below your level of competence);
NAQ4 (Having key areas of responsibility removed or replaced with more trivial or
unpleasant tasks); NAQ14 (Having your opinions and views ignored); NAQ16 (Being
given tasks with unreasonable or impossible targets or deadlines; NAQ19 (Pressure not to
141
claim something which by right you are entitled to (e.g. sick leave, holiday entitlement,
travel expenses)); and NAQ 21 (Being exposed to an unmanageable workload). The
NAQ questions that were factored into personal bullying include: NAQ 2 (Being
humiliated or ridiculed in connection with your work; NAQ 5 (Spreading gossip or
rumors about you); NAQ 6 (Being ignored, excluded or being isolated); NAQ 7 (Having
insulting or offensive remarks made about your person (i.e., habits and background), your
attitudes or your private life; NAQ 8 (Being shouted at or being the target of spontaneous
anger (or rage); NAQ 9 (Intimidating behavior such as finger-pointing, invasion of
personal space, shoving, blocking/barring the way); NAQ 10 (Hints or signals from
others that you should quit your job); NAQ11 (Repeated reminders of errors or mistakes);
NAQ 12 (Being ignored or facing a hostile reaction when you approach); NAQ 13
(Persistent criticism of your work and effort); NAQ 15 (Practical jokes carried out by
people you don’t get on with); NAQ 17 (Having allegations made against you); NAQ 20
(Being the subject of excessive teasing and sarcasm); and NAQ 22 (Threats of violence
or physical abuse or actual abuse).
The implications of this finding are that this may serve as an explanation for the
absenteeism, burnout, turnover intention, and overall occupational stress that are
prevalent in the IT work environment (Ahuja et al., 2007; Hetland et al., 2007;
Maudgalya et al., 2006; Rose, 2007). By addressing the work-related forms of bullying,
organizations can prevent employees from experiencing burnout and desire to leave the
position due to being exposed to unmanageable workloads and limited to no vacation
time, frustration and stress due to necessary information being withheld which
subsequently impacts the ability to complete expected work tasks, and boredom and lack
142
of motivation created by mismatching the employee’s skill set with the knowledge
requirements for the task. By addressing the personal forms of bullying, organizations
can prevent employees from feeling isolated, intimidated and ridiculed to the extent that
they lose motivation to communicate with others at the workplace for fear of ridicule and
hostility against them. Workers who feel targeted and fail to be productive develop a
negative attitude and eventually leave the workplace. These workers could be motivated
to participate in productive discussions with the organization as an advocate for the
development of positive solutions to personal bullying.
Work environments such as IT that emphasize productivity levels that need to
keep up with intense competition will more than likely be more prone to work-related
bullying than personal bullying. An assumption can be made that the possibility exists
that workers may be exposed to an overlap of different forms of workplace bullying.
Internal competition between workers in the field of IT can also create a work
environment that experiences both work-related and personal forms of workplace
bullying because workers who cannot keep up with demand placed on them may be
constantly reminded of their mistakes and shortcomings. The possibility of a relationship
between work-related and personal forms of workplace bullying should be investigated
further to determine the extent of the relationship between the two factors.
Hypothesis 4
The findings of the study indicate that there is no statistical difference in
perceptions of psychological empowerment between male and female IT professionals.
This finding is more than likely due to the extremely low sample size. Only 28 males and
10 females responded to the all of the questions provided. According to Creswell (2005),
143
a researcher would need at least 15 members in each group to be able to conduct an
experiment that would respond to statistical procedures. Extant literature has not focused
on gender differences in psychological empowerment among IT professionals. A
recommendation is made to pursue this focus area in future research efforts.
Hypothesis 5
The findings of the study indicate IT professionals in the executive job type do
report a lower frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT professionals who are
not in the executive job type. This finding is congruent with and supported by the
literature review. The executive job type is associated with power on a structural level
and the direction of control moves vertically and horizontally. Three sources of power
(hierarchical authority, resource control, network centrality) have been proposed (Astley
& Sachdeva, 1984). In hierarchical authority, power is assumed based on the position
held by the individual in the organization. Power is attributed to the position by
subordinates who comply with superiors because of the rights and privileges that are
conveyed to the position. The superior is placed in a position of power, one that can
expect obedience. Formal prerogative is sanctioned by the organization, allowing the
subordinate to depend on the superior for needs to be met (Astley & Sachdeva).
Resource control is derived from the idea that resources can be withheld or
allocated through the control possessed by a designated entity (Yuchtman & Seashore,
1967). This dependence relationship is one of the underlying bases of social exchange
theory, in which the power assumed by actors is said to be asymmetric. Organizations are
deemed to be open social systems in which resources are allocated to critical processes
primarily, and other processes secondarily (Astley & Sachdeva, 1984). The ability to
144
withhold or ultimately control resources that are scarce creates a power dynamic between
actors within an organization.
Organizations are typically divided and differentiated by horizontal (division or
department) and vertical (hierarchical) administrative-based entities. Network centrality
focuses on the interactions that occur between administrative-based entities and the
power relationships that occur (Tichy & Fombrun, 1979). Actors interconnected closely
in the network by dependent workflows gain power because of the interdependencies that
make each actor indispensable within the network. Lateral or horizontal violence occurs
between individuals who are part of the same organizational hierarchy and engage in
verbal and non-verbal or overt or covert forms of violence (The Center for American
Nurses, 2008; Scott, 2008).
Hypothesis 6
The findings of the study indicate IT professionals who work in the public work
sector do not report a lower frequency of exposure to workplace bullying than IT
professionals who work in the private sector. This finding is more than likely due to the
extremely low sample size. Out of the 38 respondents, 8 were identified as having been
exposed to workplace bullying, 2 of which worked in the public sector and 6 of which
worked in the private sector. Extant literature has not focused on workplace bullying and
the differences between work sectors among IT professionals. A recommendation is
made to pursue this area in future research efforts.
Study Design Considerations
As with any research study, the potential for design errors in this study is present.
According to Creswell (2005), researchers attempt to derive meaning and understanding

145
to the problem being studied based on examination of the extant literature and personal
experiences. In this process, the potential for bias is possible, making the interpretation
of the results subject to the outcomes of future research efforts in order to fully grasp the
complexity of the phenomenon.
Instrumentation
Validity of this study was also limited to the reliability of the instruments used.
According to Creswell (2002), the selection of the instruments to be used in research
requires thought and consideration to ensure that the most appropriate instruments are
identified. Using instruments that have proven validity and reliability and that have been
used in prior research studies by numerous investigators decreases the likelihood of
experiencing problems related to validity and reliability. Questions presented from the
NAQ-R (Einarsen, Raknes, Matthiesen & Hellesøy, 1994) have been found to possess an
acceptable level of construct validity for workplace bullying. Questions presented from
The Psychological Empowerment Instrument (Spreitzer, 1995) have been found to
possess an acceptable level of construct validity for psychological empowerment.
Spreitzer’s Psychological Empowerment Instrument was chosen over other available
instruments because of the focus of the instrument on self-orientation that individuals
have with work roles and this best matches the inquiry goals of this study.
Sampling Errors
Convenience sampling was used to acquire participants for the study. All
participants were members of the Association of Information Technology Professionals
and had to meet the criteria of currently working in the IT profession. The response rate
146
of 2.5% for this study was less than the typical response rate, however. Although 1,500
invitations to participate in the study were sent out via e-mail, only 55 responded and 38
completed the survey questionnaire completely. According to Creswell (2005),
approximately 30 participants are required for a correlational study. The sample size
selection was deemed appropriate for the quantitative method, correlational design.
According to Neuman (2003), the acquisition of participants for a research study
needs to occur on a volunteer basis for ethical reasons. This limitation places a constraint
on the reliability of research studies in general because the results obtained may not be
able to be generalized to the overall population as a result. Having a sample that is
representative of the population is what permits the researcher to “draw conclusions from
the sample about the population as a whole” (Creswell, 2005, p. 145). Convenience
sampling can be problematic because the researcher uses a sample that is readily
available based on the determination that the sample possesses characteristics that are
related to the focus of the study. However, this technique is non-probabilistic and as such
lacks the rigor of probabilistic sampling techniques (Creswell). The implications of using
a non-probabilistic technique in this study are that the researcher cannot guarantee that
the sample is representative of the IT population in general.
Implications for Leadership
Leadership is considered to be fundamental in creating competitive advantages in
IT (Hetland et al., 2007; Skogstad, Einarsen et al., 2007; Choi, 2007). Communication,
relationships, organizational culture, and psycho-social factors are all influenced by the
examples set forth by the leaders of the organization. The findings of this study have
implications for leaders and the extent to which a transformational leadership style is
147
utilized to empower employees by creating a zero-tolerance for workplace bullying. In
order for the IT work environment to effectively align organizational goals and
objectives, leadership of the IT organization needs to empower employees to bring about
increased commitment and productivity (Hetland et al., 2007; Skogstad, Einarsen et al.,
2007). IT managers could set an example as effective empowering role models by
motivating IT workers through meaningful work (Hetland et al.; Skogstad et al.). Future
research on workplace bullying and psychological empowerment in the IT work
environment may provide additional insight into the benefits of psychological
empowerment and the direct and indirect costs of workplace bullying to the long-term
viability of the organization.
Human Capital Costs
The IT professional is considered significantly valuable to the organization.
Leaders in firms depend on the IT professional to maintain the IT infrastructure in the
organization in order to remain competitive in industry (Niederman et al., 2006; Major et
al., 2007). The IT profession and overall industry is one that is considered a structure of
power (Baskerville, Stage, & DeGross, 2000). IT professionals’ possession of high-
skilled technical knowledge and information sought by the business world forces the
organization to depend on human capital control (Niederman et al.). Numerous
businesses and global organizations list the alignment of IT with the goals and objectives
of the business as one of the top critical success factors (Major et al., 2007).
An increased understanding of workplace bullying and its relationship to
psychological empowerment can potentially benefit leaders by improving awareness into
the factors that allow IT professionals to be most productive and committed to

148
organizational goals and objectives. Psychological empowerment as a mitigating factor in
stressful work environments such as IT may play a role in minimizing or even
eliminating the escalation of behaviors in the workplace that lead to workplace bullying.
IT leaders such as CIOs and CTOs and Human Resources leaders may benefit from an
increased understanding of the negative impact of workplace bullying in a highly
competitive workplace environment such as IT. In cultivating an empowering and
productive workplace, the levels of innovation and development of disrupting
technologies could increase with added awareness.
Power in Leadership
According to Foucault (1979), power relations and controls are present by default
in the ability to implement technology. Those in society who are privileged in knowledge
control the ideologies that surround such goods as IT (Kvasny & Truex, 2000). The value
of technology is based on the cultural value established within the social group that
controls the creation, implementation, and sustainability in the economic and social
hierarchy (Kvasny & Truex). Those who understand the implications of technology,
typically IT professionals, are the ones who are not challenged as IT professionals
attempt to maintain the social order IT professionals have constructed. Technology is
viewed as maintaining and restructuring power relationships within the organization.
Power is perpetuated by those who have the knowledge to implement and understand
technology (Kvasny & Truex).
Leadership in IT needs to be able to create and emulate standards for acceptable
behavior in the IT workplace. In creating a zero tolerance work environment, leaders can
demonstrate that workers can be empowered in the workplace and that leadership in
149
general does not require an authoritative or coercive stance to be effective. The
knowledge that is possessed by leaders and professionals in different work roles in IT is
powerful in that a dependence on those workers on the part of the organization occurs by
default. Rather than exploit that power and knowledge, leaders in IT should engage in
transformational leadership behavior to empower the organization to maintain a healthy
competitive advantage. Managed power relationships that do not exploit position or
knowledge base is an essential component to fostering an empowering organizational
culture, both within the IT department and between the IT department and other
departments.
Demand for Leadership in IT
The demand for skilled IT professionals is extremely high. According to the U.S.
Department of Labor, IT will see a 68% boost in output growth between 2002 and 2012
(U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008-2009). Due to advancing of computer technology,
the expectation is that employment opportunities will increase as the demand and
development of new technologies and software applications increases and the need for
information security becomes more apparent (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). With the
increase in demand comes an increase in the demand for leadership in IT.
Employers seek IT professionals who possess soft people skills, technical skills,
and knowledge that successfully transfers. Employers also seek the ability to adapt in the
workforce. Although IT remains a critical aspect of work in all industries and sectors, the
United States experiences a shortage of IT employees that possess the necessary skills to
succeed in a dynamic, change-driven work environment. The IT worker must update and
adapt the existing skill set in order to maintain the level of qualification necessary to
150
succeed in such a dynamic industry. The typical IT professional is considered to possess
the characteristics of high intelligence, high technical skills, depth and breadth of tacit
and explicit knowledge, motivation, drive, and innovation. IT workers must possess
strong problem-solving mindsets, be analytically adept, and knowledgeable of
algorithmic methods. Necessary soft skills include the need to communicate efficiently
and to use follow through, because troubleshooting and helping others are such vital
aspects of the job (Verma & Bedi, 2008). Because there is constant interaction on the job
with other individuals, computer support specialists must be able to communicate
effectively using various methods such as written, verbal and electronic (Verma & Bedi).
The transformational IT leader is in demand because of the need to effectively
align decisions in IT with the goals and objectives of the organization. This need requires
that change can be effectively managed through careful allocation of human capital and
various resources needed to accomplish the alignment in strategy. The leader also must
be able to empower and support the IT professionals in the workplace so that an emphasis
is placed on the cultivation and nurturance of both the technical and the soft skills of the
IT professional. Rather than emphasize the technical side of the IT work environment, the
emphasis should also be made on the softer humanized skill set. There is a demand for IT
leadership who possesses both skill sets and is able to champion positive change
management through empowerment of professionals in the IT work environment.
Empowerment as an Enabler
Extant research has found that stressful work environments are known to produce
workplace bullying as a related outcome (Carayon et al., 2006; Lutgen-Sandvik, 2007;
Hauge et al., 2007). The work environment of IT is known to possess negative work-
151
related attributes (Thong & Yap, 2000; Hacker, 2003; Carayon et al.). The profession
experiences a significant amount of occupational stress, absenteeism, burnout, and
turnover due to job demands (Carayon et al.; Sethi et al., 2004; Thong & Yap). Long
working hours, intense deadlines, budget restrictions, skill obsolescence, and information
overload are contributory factors to the negative aspects of the IT work environment.
Role ambiguity, role stress, perceived lack of control over resources, work overload,
conflicting needs, interpersonal conflict, uncertainty, and time pressures are also issues
that are known to be present (Sethi et al.).
This work environment creates a sense of disempowerment that causes a decrease
in productivity and general disability. IT work environments in which IT leaders and
managers are prone to verbally assault and disempower workers are known to experience
a high rate of turnover (Hacker, 2003). Costs associated with replacing IT staff due to
turnover are significant. The average cost to replace an IT professional can vary from
twice to seven times the worker’s annual salary depending on circumstances involved
(Kochanski & Ledford, 2001). Workplace bullying may be a negative workplace
outcome that is present in the IT work environment. Organizations that gain awareness
into the problem of workplace bullying and the benefits of empowerment may be able to
mitigate risk factors and preserve shareholder value due to realized cost savings.
Leaders in IT can empower the employees by examining the presenting problems
in the organization and developing strategies that use corrective actions to enable positive
changes. This examination process should involve all of the workers to create an
environment that encourages participation. After an initial assessment of the organization
is conducted and related issues identified, a measurement should be taken to determine

152
the baseline for that issue. Methods for addressing the problem should be developed and
implemented using a specific plan of action that describes how different problems will be
approached and resolved. At specified intervals, another assessment or evaluation should
be conducted to measure progress and to determine to what extent the corrective actions
are addressing the issue through satisfactory resolution of the issue. Adjustments should
be made as needed and subsequently implemented using the revised approach.
Throughout the entire iterative process, employees should be involved to create a sense of
competence, impact, meaning, and self-determination in the workplace.
Leadership Roles in the Organization
Individuals who maintain leadership roles in IT, Human Resources, and the
executive level (CEO, CFO) need to place an emphasis on technical expertise and
strategic relationship building (Medcof, 2007). The chief technology officer (CTO) and
chief information officer (CIO) positions use several bases of power, including structural
power, expert power, ownership power, and prestige power. If not managed effectively,
the bases of power will have a negative influence on the ability of the CTO to fill the
leadership roles needed to engage in strategic decision-making and to cultivate high-
quality relationships based in empowerment in the workplace (Medcof). Power over the
allocation of resources could impact the effective allocation of resources if leadership
misuses that power of allocation. Power that is mismanaged can also perpetuate the
acceptance of an organizational culture that enables workplace bullying rather than an
organizational culture that enables psychological empowerment and transformational
leadership. Leaders have an opportunity to shape and mold the culture of the organization
through role modeling and leading by example.

153
Recommendations for Future Research
Several recommendations for future research should be made. The first
recommendation relates to the replication of the study. The second area involves the
investigation into how to minimize the attrition rate of participants in future studies. A
third area involves the use of different approaches that involve various methodologies
and identification of the perpetrator of the bullying.
Replication of This Study
The IT profession had never been investigated in extant literature on workplace
bullying prior to this study. The IT work environment possesses characteristics that may
make that environment prone to workplace bullying. In order to gain a better
understanding of the work-related issues that are found in the IT work environment more
research needs to be conducted. Using the current study design and method, replicating
the study to include a larger sample may provide additional insight into the dynamics of
the IT work environment. Replication of the results of this study should increase the
confidence in the achieved results and related conclusions. Replicating the study may
also provide insight into additional unforeseen trends and patterns in the IT work
environment specifically. The extent to which the IT work environment is similar to non-
IT work environments may also be determined.
Improving Response Rate
Participants should be notified of the study well in advance and once the study
commences, a follow-up to the initial invitation to participate should occur in an effort to
improve response rate. If possible and warranted, incentives should be used to encourage
participation in the study. The study questionnaire should be designed to encourage

154
participation through cultivation of interest in the topic and a sense of purpose for the
participant. The order of delivery of the questionnaires may improve response rate. The
more positively-worded Psychological Empowerment Instrument should be presented
first and then the less than positively-worded Negative Acts Questionnaire to encourage
respondents to complete the survey.
Additional Methods and Measurement Options
Some researchers have made the recommendation that future research should
modify the NAQ questionnaire by adding a question pertaining to who the perpetrator
was for each negative act identified by the target (Lutgen-Sandvik et al., 2007; Salin,
2008). Keashly and Neuman (2005) posit that knowing the source of the aggression is a
key element to deepening understanding of workplace bullying. In addition, knowing the
direction of the bullying, whether horizontal or vertical is an area that warrants further
investigation. According to Lutgen-Sandvik et al., (2007), determining the exact duration
of the exposure to negative acts related to workplace bullying would assist in determining
whether an escalation of the problem is possible. A mixed method study might allow for
the revelation of additional information related to the experiences of the target. By using
a qualitative approach and interviewing participants, an increased perspective into the
phenomenon of workplace bullying in the IT work environment may be obtained.
Recommendations for AITP
The organization should provide the results of this study to its members to
encourage communication and discussion among members about workplace bullying and
psychological empowerment. The provision of educational materials to members is
recommended and as additional knowledge is gained, updates to the information should

155
be disseminated. Leaders of the organization should create and implement a healthy
workplace policy that could serve as a model for other IT organizations. The organization
could also offer public support for legislative reform and campaign for change. A
possible benefit that could be offered to members is counseling and related support
services for targets, witnesses, and perpetrators of workplace bullying. Lastly, AITP
should be involved in future research efforts.
Recommendations for Leadership
Organizational leaders should champion the creation and implementation of
healthy workplace policies to take a proactive role in the prevention of workplace
bullying. Awareness of workplace bullying in the organization should action specific
provisions and procedures of the healthy workplace policy to ensure that the problem is
dealt with quickly and professionally. Educational programs and workshops should be
offered on a regular basis to employees for professional development through sharing of
knowledge and best practices.
Summary
investigation was to add to the extant knowledge about the phenomenon of workplace
bullying and to determine the possible mitigation value of psychological empowerment.
The goals and objectives for this study were achieved in that additional insight and
knowledge into the phenomenon of workplace bullying were obtained. Additional
knowledge and future research could lead to the formulation of proactive rather than
156
reactive strategies for dealing with this costly societal problem. Through the creation of
increased and ongoing awareness, intolerance measures through legal reform and positive
changes in the work environment, workplace bullying prevalence may decrease and
benefits to society may increase as a result.

157
REFERENCES
Adams, A., & Crawford, N. (1992). Bullying at work: How to confront and overcome it.
London: Virago Press.
Afza, M. (2005, July-September). Superior-subordinate relationships and satisfaction in
Indian small business enterprises. Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers,
30(3), 11-19.
Agervold, M. (2007). Bullying at work: A discussion of definitions and prevalence,
based on an empirical study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 161-172.
Agervold, M., & Mikkelsen, E. (2004). Relationships between bullying, psychosocial
work environment and individual stress reactions. Work & Stress, 18(4), 336-
351.
Ahuja, M., Chudoba, K., Kacmar, C., McKnight, D., & George, J. (2007, March). IT
road warriors: Balancing work-family conflict, job autonomy, and work
overload to mitigate turnover intentions. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 1-17.
Astley, W. G., & Sachdeva, P. S. (1984). Structural sources of interorganizational
power: A theoretical synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 9, 104-113.
Ayoko, O. B., Callan, V. J., & Hartel, C. (2003). Workplace conflict, bullying, and
counterproductive behaviors. The International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, 11(4), 283-301.

158
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1977a). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1977b). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. (Reprinted in
H. Friedman [Ed.], Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press,
1998).
Baskerville, R, Stage, J, & DeGross, J. I. (2000). Organizational and social perspectives
in information technology. Norwell, MA: Springer.
Beckhard, R. (1969). Organizational development: Strategies and models. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Berdahl, J. L. (2007). Harassment based on sex: Protecting social status in the context of
gender hierarchy. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 641-658.
Bhatnagar, J. (2005, December). The power of psychological empowerment as an
antecedent to organizational commitment in Indian managers. Human Resource
Development International, 8(4), 419-433.
Birkeland Nielsen, M., Berge Matthiesen, S., & Einarsen, S. (2008, April). Sense of
Coherence as a Protective Mechanism Among Targets of Workplace Bullying.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13(2), 128-136.

159
Björkqvist, K. (2001). Social defeat as a stressor in humans. Physiology & Behavior,
435-442.
Björkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Hjelt-Back, M. (1994). Aggression among university
employees. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 173-184.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.
Boucaut, R. (2001). Understanding workplace bullying: A practical application of
Giddens’ Structuration Theory. International Education Journal, 65-73.
Bowen, D. E. & Lawler, E. E. (1995). Empowering service employees. Sloan
Management Review, 36(4), 73-85.
Brodsky, C. M. (1976). The harassed worker. Toronto, Canada: Lexington Books, D.C.
Broome, B. A. (2008, Winter). Dealing with sharks and bullies in the workplace. The
ABNF Journal, 28-30.
Browne, M. N., & Smith, M. A. (2008). Mobbing in the workplace: The latest
illustration of pervasive individualism in American law. Employee Rights and
Employment Policy Journal, 12, 131-159.
Burke, W. W. (1986). Leadership as empowering others. In S. Srivastva (Ed.),
Executive power (pp. 51-77). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carayon, P., Schoepke, J., Hoonakker, P., Haims, M. C., & Brunette, M. (2006,
October). Evaluating causes and consequences of turnover intention among IT
workers: The development of a questionnaire survey. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 381-397.
160
Carmeli, A., Brueller, D., & Dutton, J. E. (2009). Learning behaviours in the workplace:
The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety.
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28, 81-98.
Chan, Y. H., Taylor, R. R., & Markham, S. (2008, Winter). The role of subordinates’
trust in a social-exchange driven psychological empowerment process. Journal of
Managerial Issues, 20(4), 444-467.
Chen, H., & Chen, Y. (2008, Fall). The impact of work redesign and psychological
empowerment on organizational commitment in a changing environment: An
example from Taiwan’s state-owned enterprises. Public Personnel Management,
37(3), 279-302.
Choi, J. N. (2007). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior: Effects of work
environment characteristics and intervening psychological processes. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 28, 467-484.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The psychological empowerment process:
Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review. 471-482.
Cook, K. & Emerson, R. (1978). Power, equity, and commitment in exchange networks,
American Sociological Review, 43, 721.
Cowie, H., Naylor, P., Rivers, I., Smith, P. K., & Pereira, B. (2002). Measuring
workplace bullying. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 33-51.
Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201-205.

161
Davenport, N., Schwartz, R. D., & Elliott, G. P. (2002). Mobbing: Emotional abuse in
the American workplace (2nd ed.). Ames, IA: Civil Society Publishing.
Djurkovic, N., McCormack, D., & Casimir, G. (2005, Winter). The behavioral reactions
of victims to different types of workplace bullying. International Journal of
Organization Theory and Behavior, 439-460.
Doult, B., & Scott, G. (2008, March 5th). Minister to look into allegations of racism and
bullying at NMC. Nursing Standard, 22(26), 6.
Drake, A. R., Wong, J., & Salter, S. B. (2007). Empowerment, motivation, and
performance: Examining the impact of feedback and incentives on
nonmanagement employees. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 19, 71-79.
Einarsen, S., & Skogstad, A. (1996). Bullying at work: epidemiological findings in
public and private organizations. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 5, 185-202.
Einarsen, Raknes, Matthiesen, S. B, & Hellesøy, O. H. (1994). The Negative Acts
Questionnaire. Norway: Bergen Bullying Research Group.
Einarsen, S., Raknes, B.I., & Matthiesen, S. B. (1994). Bullying and its relationship to
work and environment quality. European Work and Organizational
Psychologist, 4, 381-401.
Einarsen, S., & Hoel, H. (2001, May). The negative acts questionnaire: development,
validation and revision of a measure of bullying at work. Paper presented at the
meeting of the 10th European Congress on Work and Organisational
Psychology, Prague, Czech Republic.

162
Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2003). The concept of
bullying at work. In Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.).
(2003). Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: International
perspectives in research and practice. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Einarsen, S., Mikkelsen, E. G. (2003). Individual effects of exposure to bullying at
work. In Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2003).
Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: International perspectives in
research and practice. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review,
27, 31-41.
Esler, M., Schwarz, R., & Alvarenga, M. (2008). Mental stress is a cause of
cardiovascular diseases: From skepticism to certainty. Stress and Health, 24,
175-180.
Firtko, J. D., & Edenborough, M. (2007). Personal resilience as a strategy for surviving
and thriving in the face of workplace adversity: A literature review. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 60(1), 1-9.
Focault, M. (1979). Power, truth, strategy. Sydney, Australia: Feral Publications.
Fox, S., & Stallworth, L. E. (2005, June). Racial/ethnic bullying: Exploring links
between bullying and racism in the US workplace. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 66(3), 438-456.
Freidson, E. (1986). Professional powers: A study of the institutionalization of formal
knowledge. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

163
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright
(Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research.
Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and
application (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
Glasø, L., Matthiesen, S. B., Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2007). Do targets of
workplace bullying portray a general victim personality profile? Scandinavian
Journal of Psychology, 48, 313-319.
Glendinning, P. M. (2001, Fall). Workplace bullying: Curing the cancer of the
American workplace. Public Personnel Management, 30(3), 269-286.
Granello, D., & Wheaton, J. (2004, Fall). Online data collection: Strategies for research.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 82(4), 387-393.
Gupta, B., & Sharma, N. K. (2008). Compliance with bases of power and subordinates’
perception of superiors: Moderating effect of quality of interaction. Singapore
Management Review, 1-24.
Hacker, C. A. (2003, Spring). Turnover: A silent profit killer. Information Systems
Management, 14-18.
Harvey, M., Treadway, D. C., & Heames, J. T. (2007). The occurrence of bullying in
global organizations: A model and issues associated with social/emotional
contagion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(11), 2576-2599.

164
Hatch-Maillette, M. A., Scalora, M. J., Bader, S. M., & Bornstein, B. H. (2007). A
gender-based incidence study of workplace violence in psychiatric and forensic
settings. Violence and Victims, 449-462.
Hauge, L. J., Skogstad, A., & Einarsen, S. (2007). Relationships between stressful work
environments and bullying: Results of a large representative study. Work &
Stress, 21(3), 220-242.
Hawley, A. H. (1950). Human ecology: A theory of community structure. New York:
Ronald Press.
Heames, J., & Harvey, H. (2006). Workplace bullying: A cross-level assessment.
Management Decision, 44(9), 1214-1230.
Hechanova, R. M., Alampay, R. B. A., & Franco, E. P. (2006). Psychological
empowerment, job satisfaction, and performance among Filipino service
workers. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 72-78.
Hetland, H., Sandal, G., & Johnsen, T. (2007, March). Burnout in the information
technology sector: Does leadership matter? European Journal of Work &
Organizational Psychology, 16(1), 58-75.
Hinchberger, P. A. (2009, January-March).Violence against female student nurses in the
workplace. Nursing Forum, 44(1), 37-46.
Hodgins, M. (2008). Taking a health promotion approach to the problem of bullying.
International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 8(1), 13-23.
Hodson, R., Roscigno, V. J., & Lopez, S. H. (2006, November). Chaos and the abuse of
power: Workplace bullying in organizational and interactional context. Work
and Occupation, 382-416.

165
Hoel, H., & Salin, D. L. (2003). Organizational antecedents of workplace bullying. In
Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2003). Bullying and
emotional abuse in the workplace: International perspectives in research and
practice. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Hoel, H., Cooper, C. L., & Faragher, B. (2001). The experience of bullying in Great
Britain: The impact of organizational status. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 443-465.
Hoel, H., Cooper, C. L . (2001). Origins of bullying: Theoretical frameworks for
explaining workplace bullying in Tehrani, N. (Ed.). (2001). Building a culture of
respect: Managing bullying at work. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Homans, G. (1961). Social Behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Hutchinson, M., Wilkes, L., Vickers, M., & Jackson, D. (2008). The development and
validation of a bullying inventory for the nursing workplace. Nurse Researcher,
15(2), 19-29.
Jennifer, D., Cowie, H., & Katerina, A. (2003). Perceptions and experience of
workplace bullying in five different working populations. Aggressive Behavior.
489-496.
Jha, S. S., & Nair, S. K. (2008, December). Influence of locus of control, job
characteristics, and superior-subordinate relationship on psychological
empowerment. Journal of Management Research, 8(3), 147-161.

166
Jordan, P. J., & Sheehan, M. (2000). Stress and managerial bullying: Affective
antecedents and consequences. (Tech Rep. No. Transcending Boundaries:
Integrating People, Processes and Systems). Brisbane, Australia: Griffith
University.
Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
Keashly, L., & Neuman, J. H. (2005). Bullying in the workplace: Its impact and
management. Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, 8, 335-373.
Keashly, L, & Nowell, B. (2003). Workplace bullying and conflict resolution. In
Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2003). Bullying and
emotional abuse in the workplace: International perspectives in research and
practice. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Kelly, H. H. (1972). Attribution in social interaction in E. E Jones (Ed.) Attribution:
Perceiving the Causes of Behaviour, Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Kelloway, E. K., Barling, J., & Hurrell, J. J. (Eds.). (2006). Prevalence of workplace
aggression in the U. S. Workforce. In [Editors] (Eds.), Handbook of Workplace
Violence (2nd ed., pp. 47-89). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.
Kerfoot, K. M. (2008, April). Leadership, civility, and the ‘No Jerks’ rule. Urologic
Nursing, 28(2), 149-150.
Kochanski, J. & Ledford, G. (2001, May-June). “How to keep me” – Retaining
technical professionals. Research-Technology Management, 43(3), 31-38.
Krishna, Y. (2007, October). Psychological empowerment and organizational
commitment. ICFAI Journal of Organizational Behavior, 6(4), 26-36.

167
Kvasny, L., & Truex, D. (2000). Information technology and the cultural reproduction
of social order: A research paradigm, In Baskerville, R, Stage, J, & DeGross, J.
I. (2000). Organizational and social perspectives in information technology.
Norwell, MA: Springer.
Lapp, R. E. (1965). The New Priesthood: The Scientific Elite and the Uses of Power.
New York: Harper & Row.
LaVan, H., & Martin, W. (2008). Bullying in the U.S. workplace: Normative and
process-oriented ethical approaches. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 147-165.
Levin-Rozalis, M., Bar-on, N. and Hartaf, H. (2003). The structuring process of the
social representation of violence in abusive men. Psychology and Culture. 9(4).
Lewis, D., & Gunn, R. (2007). Workplace bullying in the public sector: Understanding
the racial dimension. Public Administration, 85(3), 641-665.
Lewis, S. E., & Orford, J. (2005). Women’s experiences of workplace bullying:
Changes in social relationships. Journal of Community & Applied Social
Psychology, 29-47.
Leymann, H. (1990). Mobbing and psychological terror at workplaces, Violence and
Victims, 5, 119-126.
Lines, R. (2007, June). Using power to install strategy: The relationships between expert
power, position power, influence tactics, and implementation success, Journal of
Change Management, 7(2), 143-170.
Longenecker, C. O., & Scazzero, J. A. (2003). The turnover and retention of IT manager
in rapidly changing organizations. Information Systems Management, 59-65.

168
Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2003, May). The communicative cycle of employee emotional
abuse: Generation and regeneration of workplace mistreatment. Management
Communication Quarterly, 471-501.
Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006, December). Take this job and…: Quitting and other forms of
resistance to workplace bullying. Communication Monographs, 73(4), 406-433.
Lutgen-Sandvik, P., Tracy, S. J., & Alberts, J. K. (2007, September). Burned by
bullying in the American workplace: Prevalence, perception, degree, and impact.
Journal of Management Studies, 837-862.
Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2007, October). “…But words will never hurt me,” Abuse and
bullying at work: A comparison between two worker samples. Ohio
Communication Journal, 45, 81-105.
Major, D. A., Davis, D. D., Germano, L. M., Fletcher, T. D., Sanchez-Hucles, J. &
Mann, J. (2007, Fall). Managing human resources in information technology:
Best practices of high-performing supervisors. Human Resource Management,
46(3), 411-427.
Makaros, A., & Itzhaky, H. (2008). Work-related stress and social workers’ perceptions
of effectiveness in light of recent changes in social and economic policies in
Israel. Social Development Issues, 30(2), 45-58.
Martin, W. (2008, Summer). Is your hospital safe? Disruptive behavior and workplace
bullying. Hospital Topics, 86(3), 21-28.
Maslow, Abraham. (1971). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York:
Penguin Arkana.
169
Matthiesen, S., & Einarsen, S. (2007, December). Perpetrators and targets of bullying at
work: Role Stress and individual differences. Violence & Victims, 22(6), 735-
753.
Maudgalya, T., Wallace, S., Daraiseh, N., & Salem, S. (2006, May-June). Workplace
stress factors and ’burnout’ among information technology professionals: A
systematic review. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 285-297.
Mayhew, C., McCarthy, P., Chappell, D., Quinlan, M., Barker, M., & Sheehan, M.
(2004, September). Measuring the extent of impact from occupational violence
and bullying on traumatised workers. Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, 117-134.
McClelland, D. C. (1975). Power: The inner experience. New York: Irvington Press.
McCormack, D., Casimir, G., & Djurkovic, N. (2007, Spring). Symposium on
workplace bullying: introduction. International Journal of Organization Theory
and Behavior, 52-57.
McDonald, P., & Dear, K. (2008, November). The incidence and patterns of
discrimination and harassment affecting working women in Australia. Women's
Studies Journal, 22(1), 37-48.
McGregor, D. (1960). The Human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
McKay, R., Huberman-Arnold, D., Fratzl, J., & Thomas, R. (2008, June). Workplace
bullying in academia: A Canadian study. Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, 77-100.
McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in education: A conceptual
introduction (5th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.

170
Medcof, J. W. (2007, July-August). CTO power. Research Technology Management,
50(4), 23-31.
Meglich-Sespico, P., Faley, R. H., & Knapp, D. (2007). Relief and redress for targets of
workplace bullying. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 31-43.
Messersmith, J. (2007, September). Managing work-life conflict among information
technology workers. Human Resource Management, 46(3), 429-451.
Mikkelsen, E. G., & Einarsen, S. (2001). Bullying in Danish work-life: Prevalence and
health correlates. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
393-413.
Mikkelson, E., & Einarsen, S. (2002). Relationships between exposure to bullying at
work and psychological and psychosomatic health complaints: The role of state
negative affectivity and generalized self-efficacy. Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, 397-405.
Milam, A. C., Spitzmueller, C. & Penney, L. M. (2009). Investigating individual
differences among targets of workplace incivility. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 14(1), 58-69.
Moayed, F. A., Daraiseh, N., Shell, R., & Salem, S. (2006, May-June). Workplace
bullying: A systematic review of risk factors and outcomes. Theoretical Issues in
Ergonomics Science, 311-327.
Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace
deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159-1168.

171
Molm, L. D. (1990). Structure, action, and outcomes: The dynamics of power in social
exchange. American Sociological Review, 55, 427-447.
Moscovici, S. (1963). Attitudes and opinions. Annual Review of Psychology, 14, 231-
260.
Namie, G., & Namie, R. (2003). The bully at work: what you can do to stop the hurt and
reclaim your dignity on the job (Rev. ed.). Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, Inc.
Namie, G. (2007, Summer). The challenge of workplace bullying. Employment
Relations Today (Wiley), 34(2), 43-51.
Neilsen, E . (1986). Psychological empowerment strategies: Balancing authority and
responsibility in Srivastra, S. (Ed.). (2001). Executive power. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Neuman, J. H., & Baron, R. A. (2003). Social antecedents of bullying: A social
interactionist perspective. In Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L.
(Eds.). (2003). Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: International
perspectives in research and practice. London: Taylor & Francis.
Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.
Niederman, F, Griffeth, R, & Ferratt, T. W. (2006). IT workers: Human capital issues
in a knowledge-based environment. Charlotte, NC: Information Age
Publications, Inc.
Nielsen, M. B., Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2008). Sense of coherence as a
protective mechanism among targets of workplace bullying. Journal of
Occupational Behavior, 13(2), 128-136.

172
Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2008). Sampling in research on interpersonal
aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 265-272.
Norman, S., & Zawacki, R. A. (2002, Spring). Facilitating transformations in IT:
Lessons learned along the journey. Information Systems Management, 12-18.
Notelaers, G., Einarsen, S., De Witte, H., & Vermunt, J. K. (2006, October-December).
Measuring exposure to bullying at work: The validity and advantages of the
latent cluster approach. Work & Stress, 20(4), 288-301.
Olafsson, R. F., & Johannsdottir, H. L. (2004, August). Coping with bullying in the
workplace: The effect of gender, age and type of bullying. British Journal of
Guidance & Counseling, 319-333.
Peel, K. J. (2002, August). The burgher and the villein: Rethinking the problem of
bullying. New Era in Education, 50-56.
Quine, L. (1999, January 23). Workplace bullying in NHS community trust: staff
questionnaire survey. British Medical Journal, 228-232.
Rafferty, M. (2007). Bullying and harassment in the workplace. Irish Veterinary
Journal, 60(11), 689-690.
Randall, P. (2001). Bullying in adulthood: Assessing the bullies and their victims. New
York: Brunner-Routledge.
Rayner, C., & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at work: A perspective from Britain and
North America. In S. Fox & P. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work
behaviors (pp. 271-296). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Rayner, C., Hoel, H., & Cooper, C. L. (2002). Workplace bullying: what we know, who
is to blame, and what can we do. New York, New York: Taylor & Francis.
173
Richman, J. A., Rospenda, K. M., Flaherty, J. A., & Freels, S. (2001). Workplace
harassment, active coping, and alcohol-related outcomes. Journal of Substance
Abuse, 13, 347-366.
Richmond, A., & Skitmore, M. (2006, December). Stress and coping: A study of project
managers in a large ICT organization. Project Management Journal, 37(5), 5-16.
Rocker, C. F. (2008, September). Addressing nurse-to-nurse bullying to promote nurse
retention. OJIN: Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 13(3).
Rose, M. (2007, July). Why so fed up and footloose in IT? Spelling out the associations
between occupation and overall job satisfaction shown by WERS 2004.
Industrial Relations Journal, 38(4), 356-384.
Rubin, J. Z., & Brown, B. R. (1975). The social psychology of bargaining and
negotiation. New York, New York: Academic Press.
Salin, D. (2001). Prevalence and forms of workplace bullying among business
professionals: a comparison of two different strategies for measuring bullying.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 425-441.
Salin, D. (2003a). Bullying and organisational politics in competitive and rapidly
changing work environments. International Journal of Management and
Decision Making, 35-46.
Salin, D. (2003b, October). 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.

174
Salin, D. (2003c). Workplace bullying among business professionals: Prevalence,
organisational antecedents and gender differences. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Swedish School of Economics, Helsinki.
Salin, D. (2008). The prevention of workplace bullying as a question of human resource
management: measures adopted and underlying organizational factors,
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 24(3), 221-231.
Scott, D. E., & Rosenkranz, A. (2008, March/April). Transforming work environments:
The Center addresses lateral violence and bullying, Tim Porter-O’Grady
featured at Lead Summit 2008, The American Nurse, 7.
Scott, M. J., & Stradling, S. G. (2001). Trauma, duress and stress. In N. Tehrani (Ed.),
Building a culture of respect: Managing bullying at work (pp. 33-42). London:
Taylor & Francis.
Selye, H. (1974). Stress without distress. New York: J.B. Lippincott Company.
Selye, H. (1976). The stress of life (revised ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Sethi, V., King, R., & Quick, J. C. (2004). What causes stress in information systems
professionals? Communications of the ACM, 47(3), 99-102.
Simmel, G., & Wolff, K. H. (Eds.). (1950). The sociology of Georg Simmel. New York,
NY: Simon & Schuster (Free Press).
Simon, C., & Simon, D. (2006, October). Bully for you; Full steam ahead: How
Pennsylvania employment law permits bullying in the workplace. Widener Law
Journal, 16(1), 141-164

175
Skogstad, A., Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M., & Hetland, H. (2007). The
destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behavior, Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 12 (1), 80-92.
Skogstad, A., Matthiesen, S., & Einarsen, S. (2007, Spring). Organizational changes: A
precursor to bullying at work? International Journal of Organization Theory &
Behavior, 10(1), 58-94.
Spreitzer, Gretchen M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological
empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 483-504.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological psychological empowerment in the workplace:
Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal,
1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M., Doneson, D. (2007). Musings on the past and future of employee
empowerment. In T. G. Cummings (Ed.) Handbook of Organization
Development. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Strandmark, M., & Hallberg, L. (2007). The origin of workplace bullying: Experiences
from the perspective of bully victims in the public service sector. Journal of
Nursing Management, 332-341.
Sweeney, P. (2007, May). Organizational Chaos and Relative Powerlessness: Breeding
Ground for Bullies? Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(2), 77-78.
Tehrani, N. (Ed.). (2001). Building a culture of respect: Managing bullying at work.
New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

176
The Center for American Nurses calls for an end to lateral violence and bullying in
nursing work environments. (2008, April, May, June). The South Carolina
Nurse. Retrieved from http://www.scnurses.org.
Thibault, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York,
NY: Wiley.
Tichy, N. M. & Fombrun, C. (1979). Network analysis in organizational settings.
Human Relations, 32 (11), 923-965.
Thomas, K.W. & Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements of psychological
empowerment: An "interpretive" model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy
of Management Review, 15 (4), 666.
Thong, J. Y. L., & Yap, C. (2000). Information systems and occupational stress: A
theoretical framework. Omega, 28, 681-692.
Tracy, S. J., Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Alberts, J. K. (2006). Nightmares, demons, and
slaves: Exploring the painful metaphors of workplace bullying. Management
Communication Quarterly, 148-185.
Trossman, S. (2008, September/October). Behaving badly. The American Nurse.12.
Turner, J. A., & Baroudi, J. J. (1986). The management of information systems
occupations: A research agenda. Computer Personnel, 10(4), 2-11.
Turner, J. H. (1991). Structuration theory of Anthony Giddens. In The Structure of
Sociological Theory (5th ed). California: Wadsworth.
Turney, L. (2003). Mental health and workplace bullying: The role of power,
professions and ‘on the job’ training. Australian e-Journal for the Advancement
of Mental Health, 2(2), 2-9.

177
U.S. Department of Justice FBI. (2004). Workplace violence: Issues in response
(National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime). Quantico, VA. Retrieved
from http://www.fbi.gov/publications/violence.pdf.
U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008-2009). Computer and
Information Systems Managers. In Occupational outlook handbook.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Varekamp, I., Verbeek, J., & van Dijk, F. (2006). How can we help employees with
chronic illness to stay at work? A review of interventions aimed at job retention
and based on an empowerment perspective. International Archives of
Occupational Environment Health, 80, 87-97.
Vartia, M. (2001). Consequences of workplace bullying with respect to the well-being
of its targets and the observers of bullying. Scandinavian Journal of
Environmental Health, 63-69.
Vega, G., & Comer, D. R. (2005). Sticks and stones many break your bones, but words
can break your spirit: Bullying in the workplace. Journal of Business Ethics,
101-109.
Verma, A., & Bedi, M. (2008). The importance of soft skills in IT industry. ICFAI
University Journal of Soft Skills, 2(4), 15-24.
Vickers, M. (2007). Autoethnography as sensemaking: A story of bullying. Culture and
Organization, 13(3), 223-237.

178
Wallach, V. A., & Mueller, C. W. (2006). Job characteristics and organizational
predictors of psychological empowerment among paraprofessionals within
human service organizations: An exploratory study. Administration in Social
Work, 30(1), 95-115.
Weber, M. (1947). Max Weber: The Theory of Social and Economic Organization.
Translated by A. M. Henderson & Talcott Parsons. NY: The Free Press.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage
Publications.
Wendt, R. F. (2001). The paradox of empowerment: Suspended power and the
possibility of resistance. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Woelfle, C. Y., & McCaffrey, R. (2007, July-September). Nurse on nurse. Nursing
Forum, 42(3), 123-131.
Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI), (2008). Report from the 6th International
Workplace Bullying Conference. Retrieved on August 1, 2008 from
http://www.bullyinginstitute.org/events/montrealprogram.html.
Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI), (2007). The Workplace Bullying Institute
2007 U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey, 1-18.
Wrong, D. H. (2004). Power: Its forms, bases and uses. New Brunswick, NJ:
Transaction Publishers.
Yamada, D. (2008, June). Multidisciplinary responses to workplace bullying: Systems,
synergy, and sweat. Presented at the 6th International Conference on Workplace
Bullying, University of Quebec at Montreal.

179
Yamada, D. (2004). Crafting a legislative response to workplace bullying. Employee
Rights and Employment Policy Journal, 8(1).
Yildirim, D., Yildirim, A., & Timucin, A. (2007, July). Mobbing behaviors encountered
by nurse teaching staff. Nursing Ethics, 14(4), 447-463.
Yildiz, S. (2007). A ‘new’ problem in the workplace: Psychological abuse (bullying).
Journal of Academic Studies, 34, 113-128.
Young, A. M., Vance, C. M., & Ensher, E. A. (2003). Individual differences in
sensitivity to disempowering acts: A comparison of gender and identity-based
explanations for perceived offensiveness. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research,
49(3-4), 163-171.
Yuchtman, E., & Seashore, S. E. (1967, December). A system resource approach to
organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32 (6), 891-903.
Yukl, G. A., & Becker, W. S. (2006). Effective empowerment in organizations.
Organization Management Journal, 3(3), 210-231.
Zapf, D., & Gross, C. (2001). Conflict escalation and coping with workplace bullying:
A replication and extension. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 497-522.
Zapf, D., Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., and Vartia, M. (2003). Empirical findings on bullying
in the workplace. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.).
Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace. International perspectives in
research and practice. London: Taylor & Francis.

180
Zapf, D., & Einarsen, S. (2003). Individual antecedents of bullying: Victims and
perpetrators. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.). Bullying
and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace. International perspectives in research
and practice. London: Taylor & Francis.
Zapf, D., & Einarsen, S. (2005). Mobbing at work. Escalated conflicts in organizations.
In S. Fox, & P. E. Spector, (Eds.). Counterproductive work behaviour:
Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 237-270). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
181
APPENDIX A: SIGNED INFORMED CONSENT: PERMISSION TO USE PREMISES

182
183
APPENDIX B: SIGNED INFORMED CONSENT: INTRODUCTORY LETTER AND
INFORMED CONSENT FOR PARTICIPANTS OVER 18 YEARS OF AGE

184
Date: _____________
Dear Study Participant,
I am a doctoral student at the University of Phoenix working on a Doctor of Management

in Organizational Leadership and conducting a research study on the IT work experience.
Your participation in this research study will involve the completion of two surveys and
all questions must be answered in the survey to be used in the research study.
Communications with Researcher
You will be provided an e-mail address to communicate with me, the researcher, at any
time before, during and after the study. If this is not acceptable to you then please contact
me at cvpcomputing@email.phoenix.edu. I will respond to any questions you have
related to the study, the informed consent form, and your confidentiality.
Confidentiality
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to

withdraw from the study at any time, you can do so with no further obligation. The
results of the research study may be published, but no personally identifying information
will be collected and your results will be maintained in confidence. All collected data,
including electronic signature of the informed consent form will be stored on a secure
hard drive in my home. Three years after the completion of the research, I will delete the
database of collected data, including informed consent acknowledgement.
Potential Risks and Benefits
You should not experience any unusual stress or psychological, social, physical, or legal
risk greater than that which may be ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the
performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests.
Although there may be no direct benefit to you, there are possible benefits in raising
awareness about the IT workplace that could potentially facilitate improvements to the
work environment thereby helping employees, managers, organizational leaders, and
society overall.
Signature Area
By electronically signing this form I acknowledge that I understand the nature of the
study, the potential risks to me as a participant, and the means by which my identity will
be kept confidential. My signature on this form also indicates that I am 18 years old or
185
older and that I give my permission to voluntarily serve as a participant in the study
described.
I understand and agree to participate in this study.
Yes (click the checkbox to electronically sign this form and proceed to survey).
No (click the checkbox to exit the survey).

186
APPENDIX C: SCRIPT FOR COMMUNICATION WITH STUDY PARTICIPANTS

187
The following script will be used in the body of an e-mail sent to invite the participant to
be part of the study.
Date: _____________
Dear AITP member,
I am a doctoral student at the University of Phoenix working on a Doctor of Management

in Organizational Leadership and conducting a research study on the IT work experience.
I am inviting you to participate in this research study and consideration. Your

participation will involve the completion of two surveys and all questions must be
answered in the survey to be used in the research study.
It will take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete the 40 multiple choice questions.
Your responses will be kept confidential, and your participation is voluntary. Your
privacy and confidentiality is assured through the use of an online survey company.
The survey is located at SurveyMonkey – to access the survey, click here:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=wDjxmua8Cs_2fLCa3f_2bcOXzA_3d_3d
Communications with Researcher
You will be provided an e-mail address to communicate with me, the researcher, at any
time after the study. If this is not acceptable to you then please contact me at
cvpcomputing@email.phoenix.edu. I will respond to any questions you have related to
the study, the informed consent form, and your confidentiality.
Thank you for your assistance and consideration.
Cynthia V. Marcello
188
APPENDIX D: PERMISSION TO USE NEGATIVE ACTS QUESTIONNAIRE

189
190
APPENDIX E: PERMISSION TO USE PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT
INSTRUMENT
191
192
APPENDIX F: NEGATIVE ACTS QUESTIONNAIRE (NAQ-R)

193
194
195
196
APPENDIX G: PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT INSTRUMENT

197
198
APPENDIX H: DOCUMENTATION
199
Documents Researched
Journals Reviewed Databases Searched Search Phrases
ABNF Journal EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying
Academy of Management Business Source Complete

Perspectives
Academy of Management ProQuest Structural Power,

Review
Administration in Social SocINDEX

Work
Aggression and Violent ScienceDirect Aggression, Mobbing

Behavior
Aggressive Behavior EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying
American Sociological ProQuest Power Relations

Review
Annual Review of EBSCOHost

Psychology
Asian Journal of Social EBSCOHost Psychological

Psychology Empowerment
Australian e-Journal for

Advancement of Mental
Health
Behavior & Information IT Workers

Technology Journal
Behavioral Research in ProQuest

Accounting
Behavioral Science ProQuest Power

200
British Journal of Guidance EBSCOHost

& Counseling
British Medical Journal GALE PowerSearch Workplace Bullying
Communication EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying

Monographs
Communications of the Business Source Complete

ACM
Computer Personnel ACM Digital Library
Culture and Organization EBSCOHost
Employee Rights and Business Source Complete Mobbing, Bullying

Employment Policy Journal
European Journal of Work EBSCOHost Bullying

& Organizational
Psychology
European Work and EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying

Organizational Psychologist
Human Relations SAGE Full-Text

Collections
Human Resource Business Source Complete Psychological

Development International Empowerment
Human Resource ProQuest IT Worker

Management
Industrial Relations Journal SAGE Full-Text Workplace Bullying

Collections
Information Systems ProQuest IT Worker

Management
International Archives of MEDLINE Workplace Bullying

Occupational Environment
Health
201
International Education EBSCOhost

Journal
International Journal of Workplace Bullying

Management and Decision
Making
International Journal of SocINDEX Workplace Bullying

Organization Theory and
Behavior
International Journal of Bullying

Psychology and
Physiological Therapy
Irish Veterinary Journal EBSCOhost
Journal of Academic EBSCOhost

Studies
Journal of Advanced EBSCOhost Workplace Adversity

Nursing
Journal of Applied PsycARTICLES Workplace Bullying

Psychology
Journal of Applied Social EBSCOhost

Psychology
Journal of Business Ethics ProQuest Workplace Bullying
Journal of Change Business Source Complete Power

Management
Journal of Community & EBSCOhost Workplace Bullying

Applied Social Psychology
Journal of Counseling & EBSCOhost

Development
Journal of Management Business Source Complete Psychological

Research Empowerment
Journal of Management Business Source Complete Bullying

Studies
202
Journal of Managerial EBSCOhost

Issues
Journal of Nursing EBSCOhost

Management
Journal of Occupational PSYCArticles Workplace Bullying

Health Psychology
Journal of Organizational ProQuest Psychological

Behavior Empowerment
Journal of Substance Abuse SocINDEX
Journal of Vocational ScienceDirect Bullying

Behavior
Management SAGE Full-Text Workplace Bullying

Communication Quarterly Collections
Management Decision ProQuest
MIS Quarterly ProQuest IT Work Environment
New Era in Education Education Research

Complete
Nursing Ethics ProQuest
Nursing Forum EBSCOHost Workplace violence
Nursing Standard EBSCOHost
Ohio Communication EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying

Journal
Omega Gale PowerSearch
Online Journal of Issues in EBSCOHost

Nursing
Organization Management Business Source Complete

Journal
203
Physiology & Behavior
Project Management Business Source Complete

Journal
Psychology and Culture Sage Full-Text Collections
Psychological Review PsycARTICLES Self-Efficacy
Public Administration Business Source Complete
Public Personnel EBSCOHost Psychological

Management Empowerment
Research Technology EBSCOHost

Management
Scandinavian Journal of EBSCOhost

Environmental Health
Scandinavian Journal of EBSCOhost

Management
Scandinavian Journal of EBSCOhost Workplace Bullying

Psychology
Sex Roles: A Journal of Gale PowerSearch

Research
Singapore Management ProQuest Power

Review
Sloan Management Review Gale PowerSearch
Social Development Issues SocINDEX Workplace Bullying
Stress and Health EBSCOHost Stress
Systems Research and Gale PowerSearch Psychological

Behavioral Science Empowerment
The American Nurse
The International Journal of Workplace Bullying

Organizational Analysis
204
Theoretical Issues in EBSCOHost IT Workers

Ergonomics Science
University Journal of Soft

Skills
Urologic Nursing EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying
Vikalpa: The Journal for Business Source Complete Power Relations

Decision Makers
Violence and Victims ProQuest Workplace Violence
Widener Law Journal EBSCOHost
Women’s Studies Journal
Work & Stress EBSCOHost Workplace Bullying
Work and Occupation SAGE Full-Text

Collections
205
APPENDIX I: MODEL FOR WORKPLACE BULLYING

206
Figure 2. Model of workplace bullying (Moayed et al., 2006).

207
APPENDIX J: FREQUENCY COUNTS FOR NAQ QUESTIONS

208
Frequency Counts and Percentages for NAQ Questions (N = 38)
During the last 6 months, Never Now and Monthly Weekly/Daily

how often have you been
(%) then (%) (%)
subjected to the following
negative acts at your Work (%)
place?
1) Someone withholding 31.58 52.63 7.89 7.89
information which
affects your
performance
2) Being humiliated or 84.21 15.79
ridiculed in connection
with your work
3) Being ordered to do 36.84 52.63 2.63 7.89
work below your level
of competence
4) Having key areas of 52.63 39.47 7.89

responsibility removed
or replaced with more
trivial or unpleasant
tasks
5) Spreading of gossip and 73.68 26.32

rumours about you
6) Being ignored, excluded 47.37 39.47 13.16
or being isolated
7) Having insulting or 84.21 15.79
offensive remarks made
about your person (i.e.
habits and background),
your attitudes or your
private life
8) Being shouted at or 84.21 13.16 2.63

being the target of
spontaneous anger (or
rage)
209
9) Intimidating behaviour 89.47 7.89 2.63

such as finger-pointing,
invasion of personal
space, shoving,
blocking/barring the
way
10) Hints or signals from 89.47 7.89 2.63

others that you should
quit your job
11) Repeated reminders of 81.58 13.16 2.63 2.63
your errors or mistakes
12) Being ignored or facing 73.68 26.32
a hostile reaction when
you approach
13) Persistent criticism of 81.58 13.16 2.63 2.63
your work and effort
14) Having your opinions 31.58 47.37 13.16 7.89
and views ignored
15) Practical jokes carried 92.11 5.26 2.63
out by people you don’t
get on with
16) Being given tasks with 31.58 57.89 5.26 5.26

unreasonable or
impossible targets or
deadlines
17) Having allegations made 89.47 7.89 2.63

against you
18) Excessive monitoring of 65.79 23.68 10.53
your work
19) Pressure not to claim 81.58 13.16 5.26
something which by
right you are entitled to
(e.g. sick leave, holiday
entitlement, travel
expenses)
210
20) Being the subject of 92.11 7.89

excessive teasing and
sarcasm
21) Being exposed to an 47.37 44.74 2.63 5.26

unmanageable workload
22) Threats of violence or 97.37 2.63
physical abuse or actual
abuse
23) Have you been bullied at 92.11 2.63 2.63 2.63
work?
24) Have you witnessed 73.68 18.42 2.63 5.26
someone being bullied at
work?
211
APPENDIX K: BULLYING DEGREE SCORES

212
Bullying Degree Score of each Respondent
Respondent Intensity Frequency Duration Bullying
Degree Score
1 18 2 6 26
2 0 0 6 6
3 3 0 6 9
4 2 0 6 8
5 7 0 6 13
6 4 0 6 10
7 2 0 6 8
8 4 0 6 10
9 4 0 6 10
10 3 0 6 9
11 9 0 6 15
12 16 3 6 25
13 4 1 6 11
14 15 0 6 21
15 2 0 6 8
16 9 1 6 16
17 7 0 6 13
18 11 0 6 17
19 3 0 6 9
20 8 0 6 14
213
21 7 0 6 13
22 12 3 6 21
23 0 0 6 6
24 1 0 6 7
25 1 0 6 7
26 1 0 6 7
27 7 0 6 13
28 11 1 6 18
29 2 0 6 8
30 7 0 6 13
31 20 0 6 26
32 6 0 6 12
33 7 0 6 13
34 3 0 6 9
35 8 1 6 15
36 1 0 6 7
37 19 4 6 29
38 7 0 6 13
Average Bullying Degree Score 13.03
Minimum Bullying Degree
Score 6
Maximum Bullying Degree
Score 29
214

Dissertation Final

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Dissertation Final

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

A CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS: PERCEPTIONS OF WORKPLACE BULLYING

AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT AMONG IT PROFESSIONALS

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Management in Organizational Leadership and

Information Systems and Technology

Robert Braudy, Ph.D., Mentor

Michelle Carmel, Ph.D., Committee Member

Arlene Sullivan, Ph.D., Committee Member

Accepted and Signed:

Accepted and Signed:

Accepted and Signed:

relationship between workplace bullying and psychological empowerment. The research

psychological empowerment is negatively correlated to workplace bullying. The study

more frequently than personal forms of workplace bullying. IT professionals in the

frequency and forms of exposure to workplace bullying by IT professionals and (b)

psychological empowerment in the IT work environment. The limitations of this study

and suggestions for future research are discussed.

family, friends, doctoral cohort, committee, mentor, and fellow colleagues. To my

encouragement, feedback, and support along the journey.

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ xii

LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... xiv

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1

Background of the Problem .................................................................................................2

Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................6

Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................7

Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................8

Significance to the IT Profession ........................................................................................ 8

Nature of the Study ............................................................................................................12

Research Questions ............................................................................................................16

Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................................19

Social Exchange Theory ................................................................................................... 20

Theories Used to Explain Workplace Bullying ................................................................ 21

Scope, Limitations, and Delimitations ...............................................................................27

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........................................................... 31

Workplace Bullying ...........................................................................................................35

Workplace Bullying Defined ............................................................................................ 35

Historical Overview of Workplace Bullying .................................................................... 38

Social Exchange Theory ................................................................................................... 45

Power and Social Exchange .............................................................................................. 47

Bases of Social Power ....................................................................................................... 48

Structural Sources of Intra-Organizational Power ............................................................ 50

Current Perspectives on Workplace Bullying ....................................................................51

Forms of Workplace Bullying .......................................................................................... 57

Antecedents of Workplace Bullying ................................................................................. 58

Enabling Structures and Processes.................................................................................... 63

Motivating Structures and Processes ................................................................................ 64

Precipitating Structures and Processes.............................................................................. 65

Influence of Workplace Bullying...................................................................................... 66

Work Sectors at Risk for Workplace Bullying ................................................................. 67

The IT Work Sector .......................................................................................................... 70

Historical Overview .......................................................................................................... 73

Empowerment Perspectives .............................................................................................. 74

The Psychological Empowerment Process ....................................................................... 76

Psychological Empowerment as a Mitigating Factor in Workplace Bullying.................. 79

Current Trends ...................................................................................................................83

CHAPTER 3: METHOD .................................................................................................. 88

Internal Validity .................................................................................................................96

External Validity ................................................................................................................97

Research Questions ............................................................................................................97

Population and Sampling Frame ........................................................................................98

Geographic Location ........................................................................................................101

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS .................................................................................................108

Research Design and Method ..........................................................................................109