| This qualitative study explored the way in which Human Resource (HR) professionals describe the phenomenon of workplace bullying---and how they distinguish bullying from situations where a manager is simply operating as a "tough boss." In-depth interviews were conducted with HR practitioners working in the United States, and followed a semi-structured format. The data were analyzed based on constructivist grounded theory methodology, using constant comparative analysis.;Specifically, the participants described workplace bullies as typically being unfair and inconsistent, subject to frequent emotional outbursts, misusing their power and authority, and operating with a personally-motivated focus (often without regard to the legitimate business interests of their organization). Their actions at work were interpreted as being predominantly negative , including: intimidation, threats, exploitation, control, humiliation/embarrassment, a failure to communicate, manipulation, ostracizing or ignoring employees, engaging in a pattern of obstructive behavior, and gossiping or spreading rumors.;Conversely, participants described "tough bosses" as typically being objective and fair, self-controlled, results-oriented, and organizationally-focused. Their actions at work were interpreted as predominantly positive, including: interactive, two-way communication, mentoring and tutoring their subordinates, and engaging in fair and honest conflict intended to resolve issues and problems in the best interest of their organization.;As a result of these findings, a new theory---expressed as a conceptual model---was developed which suggested that it is the presence or absence of malice that is determinative in the evaluation of whether or not a conflict situation at work is workplace bullying.;Key words: bully, workplace bully, workplace bullying, mobbing, malice, constructivist grounded theory... |
