Management, bullying and the work outcomes of Australian paramilitary
| Author | Kate Shacklock,Rod Farr-Wharton,Matthew Xerri,Yvonne Brunetto,Ben Farr-Wharton |
| Published date | 01 September 2017 |
| Date | 01 September 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0004865816647429 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Criminology
2017, Vol. 50(3) 341–359
Management, bullying
! The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
and the work outcomes
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0004865816647429
of Australian paramilitary
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
Yvonne Brunetto
School of Business and Tourism, Southern Cross University,
Queensland, Australia
Matthew Xerri
Griffith Business School, Griffith University Southport,
Queensland, Australia
Kate Shacklock
Griffith Business School, Griffith University Southport,
Queensland, Australia
Ben Farr-Wharton
Management Discipline Group University of Technology Sydney,
Ultimo, Australia
Rod Farr-Wharton
University of the Sunshine Coast Maroochydore, Queensland, Australia
Abstract
This study compared the impact of perceived organisational support from management upon
bullying of soldiers and police officers and their work outcomes (wellbeing, affective com-
mitment and turnover intentions). Data from self-report surveys from 99 army personnel and
193 police officers were analysed using SEM. The results indicate that significant paths
between most variables and perceived organisational support explained 6% of bullying (com-
prising intimidation and personal attacks). Together, (a) perceived organisational support and
bullying explained almost a third (28%) of psychological wellbeing, (b) perceived organisational
support, bullying and psychological wellbeing explained over two-thirds (68%) of affective
commitment, and (c) bullying and affective commitment explained over half (53%) of turnover
intentions. Also, bullying partially mediated the relationship between perceived organisational
support and affective commitment. There were no significant differences between the two
cohorts, except for perceived organisational support from management. Implications include
that soldiers and police officers are likely to experience better workplace performance if
management support is improved. Both soldiers and police undertake emotionally difficult
Corresponding author:
Yvonne Brunetto, Southern Cross University, Locked Bag 4 Coolangatta, Coolangatta 4225, Australia.
Email: yvonne.brunetto@scu.edu.au
342
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 50(3)
tasks at times, and without adequate support, the stress of their jobs is likely to negatively
impact their wellbeing and commitment. Poor perceived management support is not sustain-
able in the long-term without negative employee consequences.
Keywords
Affective commitment, bullying, perceived organisational support from management, police
officers and soldiers, psychological wellbeing
Introduction
There is increasing public concern about the incidence of bullying in the paramilitary
contexts. For example, see the work of Koeszegi, Zedlacher, and Hudribusch (2014)
examining the sexual abuse of women soldiers, and the work of Tuckey, Dollard,
Hosking, and Winefield (2009), examining bullying in Australian police officers.
Bullying is described as involving repetitive, hostile negative acts comprising multiple
types of abusive behaviours involving a more powerful person(s) (the bully(ies)) against
less powerful person(s) (the victim(s)) (Einarsen, Hoel, Zapf, & Cooper, 2011; Rayner &
Cooper, 2006). Additionally, within the military/paramilitary, bullying also includes
‘hazing’, which is a type of intimidation that comprises ‘initiation rituals’ that humiliate
newcomers as a means of preparing them for the strongly hierarchical command power
structure. In the case of soldiers, Østvik and Rudmin (2001) identified that young,
somewhat socially isolated soldiers are those most exposed to hazing until eventually
the ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’ are united into ‘‘group solidarity’’ (Østvik & Rudmin,
2001, p. 19). Further, Evans (2013) identified that hazing was evident in the Australian
Defence Force (ADF). In summary, bullying behaviour involves interpersonal violence
and/or aggression over a period of time that causes negative outcomes for the victims
and those around them.
The negative impacts of bullying for employees are well documented. For the victim,
a higher incidence of bullying corresponds with a greater likelihood that he/she will
experience high stress and reduced wellbeing (Hansen, Hogh, & Persson, 2011;
Hansen et al., 2006). Consequently, over time, there is an increased chance that he/she
will experience stress-related illnesses, in turn causing negative psychological and/or
physical effects for the victim, the colleagues that witness the negative acts, and the
victim’s family and friends (Dick, & Rayner, 2012; Einarsen et al., 2011; Rayner &
Cooper, 2006; Salin and Hoel2011). Furthermore, bullying negatively impacts upon
organisational outcomes because it can result in lower productivity, decreased commit-
ment and increased turnover intentions (Ayree, Chen, Sun, & Debrah, 2007; Dick, 2010;
Hershcovis & Barling, 2009). Also, when victims of bullying leave, organisations typic-
ally have to replace them and cover the associated costs (Dick & Rayner, 2011).
In summary, there appear to be no rational reasons for organisations to knowingly
promote or condone bullying behaviour. SafeWork Australia (2012) undertook a study
that identified which occupations have the highest incidence of bullying/harassment in
Australia. They identified police officers as having the fourth greatest incidence of bully-
ing/harassment across Australian occupations. Soldiers were not included in the study.
Further, SafeWork Australia (2012) reported bullying in Australia as substantially higher
than internationally, and stress/bullying costs employers $AUD693 million per annum.
Brunetto et al.
343
Three categories of bullying antecedents have been identified: individual factors (such as
emotional intelligence), work group factors (such as the quality of workplace relationships
between employees) and organisational factors (such as the quality of workplace relation-
ships between supervisors and employees) (Salin & Hoel, 2011). We examined the impact of
a third factor – perceived organisational support from management (POS) – upon bullying
for two types of military/paramilitary employees – soldiers and police officers.
These two occupations share similar command rank structures, coupled with hierarch-
ical management and both have a requirement of conformity. Such contexts create an
environment that can enable institutional bullying if management do not provide adequate
support for soldiers/police officers (Salin & Hoel, 2011). In particular, a strong predictor of
bullying is when management relinquishes responsibility when faced with bullying claims
(Aasland, Skogstad, Notelaers, Neilsen, & Einarsen, 2010). This is because poor managers
rarely intervene and when they do, the negative consequences for the bully(ies) are min-
imal. In addition, within paramilitary/military organisations, some senior management
may even promote initiation rituals, believing that ‘the end justifies the means’ as long as
the final outcome is a cohesive group (Salin, 2003). Further, abusive management thrives
in a culture that permits institutional bullying (Tepper, 2007). Importantly, support from
management (or lack thereof) is linked to employee outcomes such as affective commit-
ment and turnover intentions (Ayree et al., 2007), and notably, high POS provided a buffer
against bullying (Cooper-Thomas et al., 2013). That is, we know management support can
play a key role in employee work outcomes. Hence, the support provided by management
for soldiers/police officers is one parameter affecting soldiers’ and police officers’ percep-
tions of bullying. Other factors, such as individual and work group factors, may be also
important but are not the focus of this study.
Social exchange theory (SET) is often used as a lens for examining how workplace
relationships impact work outcomes. The theory argues that when management provides
adequate resources to meet demands and recognises/rewards employees for their effort,
then over time, an intangible resource emerges from employees’ socio-emotional needs
that result in them ‘giving back’ greater service and loyalty to the organisation
(Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). However, if employees are ill-equipped with resources,
information and support to undertake their work tasks, the outcome is likely to be lower
levels of wellbeing, in turn reducing organisational commitment and increasing turnover
intentions (Brunetto, Shacklock, Teo, & Farr-Wharton, 2014; Brunetto, Teo, Shacklock,
& Farr-Wharton, 2012). Past research has identified supervisor/manager support as a
precursor of POS, (Dawley, Houghton, & Bucklew, 2010) and using SET, under ideal
conditions, high POS would ensure ‘reciprocal’ environments, where employees are
provided with sufficient resources to meet demands and adequately recognised and
rewarded for their efforts. It is therefore important to compare, for soldiers and police
officers, how POS from management impacts bullying and work outcomes. Therefore,
we undertook such a study in Australia. While there is research on bullying, the com-
parative case for police officers and soldiers in Australia remains under-researched. The
paper also provides new information about the comparative role of management within
similar paramilitary/military contexts. The research questions are:
RQ1: For police officers and soldiers, what is the impact of POS upon bullying and certain
work outcomes (wellbeing, affective commitment and turnover intentions)?
344
...
To continue reading
Request your trial