sign in sign up
<<
Home , Blacklisting, Denial, Heinz Leymann

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Mobbing and Suppression: Footprints of Their Relationships

Brian Martin and Florencia Peña Saint Martin

Introduction fied and addressed, along with their interrelations Organizations, including workplaces, deal on an and dynamics. everyday basis with talent, commitment, support- In recent years, important efforts in this direction iveness, solidarity, niceness, friendship and working have been made, dealing with (Cates together for common goals. All too often, however, & Dorsey, 2011), sexual (LeMoncheck disagreements lead to harsh conflicts. Also, com- & Sterba, 2001), / (Leymann, monly, groups are formed within organizations, 1990a) and suppression of /discontent (Sup- sometimes creating vested interests that lead to bat- pression of Dissent, 2012). There continues to be tles for power to control processes and resources as confusion about terms (for example, mobbing versus well as to impose certain viewpoints. Destructive bullying) and a lack of awareness and understanding power games linked to these interests are a common of these problems. With few exceptions (Einarsen, negative outcome because sometimes it is assumed Matthiesen & Skogstad, 1998; Bjørkelo, et al., that any means available can be used in these strug- 2008), these negative acts tend to be dealt with sepa- gles. Too often, attempts are made to degrade per- rately, one by one, not considering their overlaps sons and/or their work that threatens vested inter- and interactions. In this paper we focus on two is- ests. This can lead to various forms of institutional sues – mobbing and suppression of dis- counter-productive behaviors. To eliminate negative sent/discontent – to distinguish them from each oth- outcomes, these behaviors need to be clearly identi- er and to address some of their overlaps and interac- tions. * † Brian Martin, PhD (Physics), Professor of Social Sci- In mobbing, or “,” a group ences, University of Wollongong, Australia. He is the gangs up on a target, who usually is considered a author of many books and articles on dissent, nonviolent threat. Nasty or undermining comments, , action, scientific controversies, democracy and other unfair assignments, and many other techniques topics. He has studied tactics against justice and injustice make their life miserable (for an assessment of the for many years. Website: http://www.bmartin.cc/ most common behaviors, see Leymann, 1990b; Email: [email protected] Einarsen & Raknes, 1997; Bartlett & Bartlett, 2011). Suppression involves attacks on , protest- Florencia Peña Saint Martin, PhD (Anthropology), Visiting professorial fellow, University of Wollongong, ers, or the discontented, and on ideas or behaviors Australia; Professor, Graduate Program in Physical An- that challenge orthodoxy or powerful cliques. Mob- thropology, National School of Anthropology and Histo- bing sometimes involves suppression of dis- ry, Mexico. She has studied the relationships between human biology and social organization/stratification for many years. Since 2004, she has dealt with mobbing in * Defined by Leymann (1996) as “hostile and unethical organizations. communication, which is directed in a systematic way by Website: http://www.antropologiafisica.net … a few individuals mainly towards one individual, who, Email: [email protected] due to mobbing, is pushed into a helpless and defenseless position, being held there by means of continuing mob- Received: August 15, 2011 bing activities” (p. 168). Accepted: October 30, 2011 † We especially want to call to this phenomenon Conflict of interests: none in all kinds of organizations, not only at “workplaces.”

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 217 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

sent/discontent, but people also become targets of tioning vested interests, who is perceived as a threat. mobbing for other reasons. Suppression may involve In the mobbing scenario, social degradation of mobbing, but can also occur using other techniques. Smith as a person took place. We explain the overlap between mobbing and sup- Attacks of suppression and mobbing can also pression as well as differences. happen because the target is in the wrong place at the wrong time, such as occupying a position that Scenario 1: At a staff meeting, Dr. Smith expresses disa- powerful administrators want for somebody else. greement with the hospital’s policy on handling patients. Less frequently, efforts at social elimination are However, Smith’s views are not recorded in the official based on personal reasons, such as just disliking minutes of the meeting. Shortly after, Smith’s access to somebody or wanting to exercise revenge for per- patients is restricted, with the result that her performance sonal or professional or former disagree- figures become worse. Smith’s contract is not renewed, though other doctors with similar performance figures ments. Suppression can also happen as “collateral have their contracts signed. Nothing is ever said directly damage.” For example, when a member of a com- to Smith about her views or performance, but she loses mittee wants somebody to win a prize or get a posi- her job. tion and uses influence to prevent better-qualified candidates from getting it. In some cases, a target Scenario 2: At a staff meeting, Dr. Smith expresses disa- might not even be aware of suppression. However, a greement with the hospital’s policy on handling patients. series of apparently independent suppression events A group of administrators feels threatened and, although can be part of a mobbing process. For example, one not saying it openly, they agree that Smith has to go. But there is an obstacle: Smith has tenure. The director’s professor can have publications and promotions position is about to end and the administrators want the blocked, classes cancelled, students discriminated position for one of their own group. Bad publicity at this against and grants rejected, sometimes leading to time is highly unwelcome. Shortly after, Smith’s access of tenure or dismissal. Targets of mobbing to patients is restricted. “The fault” is found: a complaint are always very much aware of the attacks against from a patient is registered, leading to an inquiry; and them. It is not difficult to imagine the emotional rumors are circulated about Smith’s sexual behavior. The distress that can arise from confronting these situa- administrators scrutinize Smith’s file in detail, finding tions, with the potential to adversely affect mental, “faults” they never bothered about before; they put to- emotional and physical health (Einarsen, 1996; gether a panel to review the patient’s complaint and the Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996; Peña & Sánchez, 2007). previous alleged faults. Double-checking, they find the same actions of the complaint in three of Smith’s previ- ous patients, who sustain them in writing. This new evi- Connections between suppression and mobbing dence is added to Smith’s file. Nurses are instructed to The processes and sequences of events in sup- pass information to the administrators about the “misbe- pression and mobbing are remarkably similar haviors” of this “problematic and weird” doctor, and are worldwide and in many different organizations. warned not to be with Smith alone. Because Smith has Generally, an event creates a situation in which been degraded officially and covertly, colleagues stay there is a clash of interests, usually in a context of away. The nurses notice odd aspects in all that Smith unequal power with the future target of attacks in a does, which are reported to the administrators. This goes weaker position. Afterwards, a process of degrada- on for a year and a half, until the board dismisses Smith tion of the target begins, often through spreading officially for “.” One of the administrators who ganged up against Smith becomes the new director negative and malicious rumors about the target and of the hospital. their performance (Einarsen, 1999), with the end result being stigmatization, ostracism and . In Scenario 1, Smith and her ideas (disagreement Also, the target’s failings are secretly exaggerated with the hospital’s policy) were suppressed but not and achievements ignored. Much of this occurs indi- mobbed; in Scenario 2, she was mobbed as a means rectly and out of sight, without directly challenging of suppression. Both scenarios involve the same the target, although overt and obvious put-downs goal: the social elimination of the individual ques-

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 218 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

usually happen too. Regarding mobbing, Westhues helma, et al., 2010): these consequences are very (2004) calls this the “preparation phase”. harmful and easily confused with unrelated prob- Then “the fault” is found (or cynically created) lems. and used to justify the initiation of open attacks, What generally differentiates suppression and including formal complaints and/or administrative mobbing is the context that surrounds targets and inquiries or sanctions (Westhues, 2004). At this their personal position within it. If one is in a vul- stage, because the target is already alone and stig- nerable situation (as in Scenario 1), social elimina- matized as a consequence of the preparation stage, tion may follow quickly, with suppression occurring there is little or no collective protective action in by dismissal or not renewing a contract. Suppression response; most members of organizations respond to can target ideas, paradigms and lines of research too, a group logic in which it is perceived as unwise to not only individuals. For example, research data can be on the side of a stigmatized person (Goffman, be controlled, censored, distorted or discredited 1963). The mobbing gang is secure. In this situation, (Martin, 1999a). Mobbing is always performed any of the emotionally abusive behaviors that have against a human being, although the reason to attack been identified (Leymann, 1990b; Einarsen & Rak- can also include the suppression of his/her ideas and nes, 1997; Bartlett & Bartlett, 2011), as well as oth- research/teaching agendas. ers, such as cyber attacks and threats, may be used If targets have tenure, public prestige, or strong openly against the target. Rumors and malicious social support, mobbing becomes a process of deg- often continue too. radation, almost as a ritual (Thérèse & Martin, Going through this experience is incredibly 2010). The intention is to justify the perpetrator stressful and harmful, in part because suppression team’s actions for itself and for the context. This can and mobbing have the capacity to terminate long or wear down the target’s life and emotional, physical promising careers, cause financial hardship, create and psychological well-being (Westhues, 2004), and family conflicts, and break up marriages, and in part often does. Targets can be emotionally vulnerable because social degradation is often the origin of an and drained after a series of attacks, which makes it ongoing sense of losing dignity and experiencing harder to defend themselves effectively. (Lewis, 2004), when targets are unable to Suppression and mobbing threaten two basic stop the attacks.* If the conditions make it impossi- non-biological human needs of targets: (1) the feel- ble to suppress a target quickly, targets are degraded ing of belonging to a group (threatened by ostra- and made very much aware of the unfair situation in cism, isolation and devaluation); (2) self-recognition which they are placed. in the products of the tasks in which a person invests Targets find it very damaging when colleagues, effort, creativity and skills (threatened by making often even former friends, do not fight for truth and targets feel that everything they are, do and say is a justice. Most colleagues do not speak out; they fault or a big mistake). Through , the avoid being with targets in public due to the risk of perpetrators induce resignation, early retirement, stigma (Goffman, 1963). This creates in targets a dismissal, or even death due to poor health or sui- feeling of isolation and unfairness that easily leads cide. Serious adverse health consequences, such as to obsessive thoughts about the situation and chronic mental breakdowns, cardiovascular disease, and anxiety (Vartia, 2001). Being treated unfairly and fibromyalgia (see Fuentes and Lara’s study in this ostracized can create a feeling of shame (Lewis, issue) can occur as “collateral damage.” 2004) and loss of personal pride. A chronic emo- tional discomfort can set in, whose health conse- Common targets quences need to be researched further, to add to the Those perceived as different or a threat to the information already available (Einarsen, 1996; La- vested interests of groups with formal or informal power within organizations are more likely to be * Einarsen states that they are unable to defend them- suppressed or mobbed. Likely targets include: selves. However, this overlooks strategies of resistance that are sometimes used (Lutgen-Sandvik, 2006).

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 219 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

• : people – usually employees tions, spreading rumors, denial, isolation, , or former employees – who speak out in the ignoring, ostracism, reprimands, slander, and stalk- public interest, for example about corruption ing, among many others or hazards to the public (Glazer and Glazer, There is some debate about whether emotional 1989) should be considered a form of violence or • Dissenters from strong paradigms, accepted whether “violence” should refer only to physical truths, or organizational dynamics attacks.‡ However, there is general agreement that • Those who try to promote change emotional abuse can be very damaging to the tar- • Outsiders: those who stand out from cultural get’s physical, psychological, and emotional health. norms, expected roles (for example, in gen- Because it is repeated and sustained, emotional der or sexual preference), social group, or abuse can be experienced as a form of . New competence (Osborne, 2009). attacks are felt to be inevitable but are unpredicta- ble. Leymann and Gustafsson (1996) demonstrated It seems that those who do not observe the un- that emotional abuse can even lead to post-traumatic written canon of orthodoxies and prohibitions, stress disorder. which is socially, culturally and symbolically en- With emotional abuse, the , insinuations, forced, are at greater risk of being suppressed, and accusations [can] slowly eat away mobbed or both. at the victim’s self-esteem until she is incapable of judging the situation realistically. She has be- Emotional abuse come so beaten down emotionally that she Because physical violence is widely seen as ille- herself for the abuse. (Hein, 2006) * gitimate and illegal, it is seldom used within organ- izations or in public debates. Emotional abuse, exer- Emotional abuse in organizations can be carried cised though negative communication, is the pre- out by different sets of perpetrators. If the single ferred technique to both suppress and to mob. Such perpetrator is the boss, it is called “bossing” (Ker- abuse can be extremely subtle and easy to deny, as foot, 2008). However, groups of individuals can well as very difficult to apprehend and denounce, gang up together to “defend” their vested interests, making it difficult to document and to convince guaranteeing power and control for themselves, and others of its significance.† This makes it ideal for emotionally abusing in various ways those they attacking without repercussions. Negative and ag- perceive as a threat. Leymann and others named this gressive communication – verbal and nonverbal, planned, systematic and collective emotional abuse repeated and sustained – is the “weapon” used in “mobbing.” Because of the connotations of the words “bully” and “mob,” it may be better to use emotional abuse. If unchecked, it can get worse over other expressions, for example referring to the “in- time; some researchers say it always escalates. It stigator” and the “perpetrator team.” includes not only aggressive words or body lan- guage, but a variety of techniques, such as discrimi- Suppression of dissent/discontent nation, harassment, humiliation, rejection, intimida- The sorts of dissent/discontent that can trigger tion, manipulation, , constant criticism, suppression are diverse. They include conducting or denying emotional responsiveness, unfair accusa- publishing research that gives results unwelcome to powerful groups,§ teaching about sensitive topics, * Except in special arenas such as boxing and warfare. † expressing views within an organization, and ex- Examples include: faces of disgust or ignoring the target at any personal encounters; systematically opposing his pressing views in the mass or social media. These or her suggestions and ideas; criticizing his or her friends, family, partner, nationality or looks; publicly inviting ‡ The World Health Organization (2002) includes in the others to a gathering and deliberately excluding the tar- equation the intention to damage as the critical point to get; ignoring the target’s contributions but publicly ac- define an action as violent. knowledging the same actions with much enthusiasm if § Regarding smoking see, for example, Social Medicine, 5 somebody that belongs to “the group” does them. (2), 2010.

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 220 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

sorts of actions can be a challenge within a line of mance of different workers. When Jean Lennane lost command in a hierarchical organization. Another her job, other health service professionals who had sort of challenge is to a dominant orthodoxy (for not spoken out did not lose their jobs. example, of standard treatments for can- Yet another indication of suppression comes cer) or to a vested interest (for example disclosures from seeing patterns in a particular organization or about private health services). Dissidents may be field. Healthcare is a perfect example of suppression aware that what they do is threatening to powerful related to the vested interests of pharmaceutical groups, or they may think they are just doing their companies, health insurance companies and the ones jobs. that produce health infrastructure. Even Latin Amer- Reprisals against dissent/discontent are also quite ican social medicine, which addresses the conse- diverse. Suppression can include ostracism, petty quences of embodiment (Krieger, 2011) of social harassment,* lack of communication,† blocked ap- inequality due to unfair economic policies, has been pointments, denial of research grants, rejection of suppressed because it challenges the vested interests articles, spreading of rumors, threats, reprimands, of governments and corporations. Think of any con- referral to psychiatrists, forced transfers, demotions, troversial topic, such as pesticides, therapy, dismissal, or . In authoritarian regimes or antibiotics, AIDS, genetic engineering, vaccination certain contexts, political dissidents can be physical- or fluoridation. If people who question the standard ly repressed with beatings, imprisonment, forced view – or the view backed by powerful groups – psychiatric treatment, torture, or murder. regularly come under attack, then it is plausible that Sometimes it is not easy to determine whether suppression is involved (Martin, 1999b). suppression has occurred. Many applicants for jobs There are many possible reasons why someone are unsuccessful, many articles submitted to scien- suffers from ostracism, harassment, reprimands, or tific journals are rejected, and quite a few workers dismissal. A person can be targeted because of gen- lose their jobs due to redundancy. Because some der, sexuality, ethnicity, educational background, or types of reprisals can be legitimate actions, addi- accent. Sometimes poor performers are targeted, tional information is needed before concluding that being treated in a disrespectful way and often much suppression is involved. worse than they deserve. On the other hand, some- One indication of suppression is when reprisals times high achievers are targeted for attack because start shortly after the first instance of dis- they are a threat to mediocre performers. It is also sent/discontent or after it becomes well known. In possible for people to come under attack almost the late 1980s, Jean Lennane, a psychiatrist working randomly if they are in the wrong place at the wrong for a state health service in Australia, spoke to the time. For example, they may be caught between two media about the adverse effect of government fund- feuding groups in a workplace and mistakenly as- ing cutbacks on health care. Shortly afterwards, she sumed to belong to the other group because of some lost her job. The timing suggests suppression. She coincidental factor such as clothing or who they became very active against suppression of whistle- were seen talking to. blowers. (See Lennane’s article in this issue.) The concept of suppression of dissent/discontent Another indication is based on a comparison be- is closely connected with whistleblowing. Some- tween what happens to a worker who speaks out and times the reports made by whistleblowers are inves- what happens to workers who do not. If the out- tigated, and that is the end of the matter.‡ However, spoken worker has the same work performance but in many cases, whistleblowers are subject to the is treated differently, this suggests that suppression is involved. This is called the double standard test: ‡ For example, at a staff meeting a worker might raise a different standards are used to measure the perfor- concern that some funds are being misused. The boss orders an investigation and then fixes the problem. The * Such as inconvenient changes in rosters or delays in worker who spoke out is thanked, or at least not penal- processing routine requests. ised. (This is unlikely when the boss is responsible for the † Such as not being told about important meetings. problem, or has done nothing to fix it.)

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 221 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

typical reprisals we have been dealt with here. in organizations, including bossing, harassment, Sometimes they are mobbed. These are exactly the discrimination, , personal con- sorts of methods used in suppression of dis- flicts, single events of emotional abuse (such as sent/discontent. This is to be expected, because shouting or insulting), and long-term and systematic whistleblowing is a type of dissent/discontent. How- emotional abuse committed by individuals. Howev- ever, suppression can occur without whistleblowing, er, frequently, diverse forms of abuse interlink and such as when researchers obtain results that are un- interact, although the connections have been over- welcome to powerful groups. looked for the most part For instance, mobbing can The concept of whistleblowing focuses on the be used in suppression processes and suppression , whereas the concept of suppression might be a part of mobbing strategies, hence our focuses on the perpetrators of attacks and on the interest in analyzing the two processes together. process of squashing dissent/discontent. In whistle- As previously noted, mobbing is very often blowing cases, attention is diverted to the whistle- based on a power imbalance between the perpetrator blower, which can mask the problem they blew the team and the targets (Einarsen, 2000), although it whistle about. also can be used to produce this imbalance and cause targets to have difficulty defending them- Mobbing selves. Mobbing always involves isolation, degrada- There has been debate about the best way to refer tion and humiliation of the targets. Negative mes- to systematic and unacceptable group behavior in sages about them are mainly directed to their col- organizations of emotionally abusing a single target leagues and bosses through seductive “talisman for long periods and causing or potentially causing words” (Pares, 2007), emotive phrases presented to deep harm. The two terms most commonly used are the general public as justification to attack. Targets “workplace bullying” and “mobbing.” In this paper can also be directly addressed in a negative way, we choose mobbing for four reasons: both privately and publicly, with the latter also serv- a) Mobbing clearly denotes group behavior, ing as a means of degradation. whereas an individual can be a serial bully or In mobbing cases, aggression can be vertical, be bullied by just one person. both upwards (subordinates to managers, chairs and b) Mobbing is present in many different types organizers) and downwards (managers, chairs and of organizations, not only workplaces. Re- organizers to subordinates), or horizontal (between search so far has almost entirely focused on managers, chairs and organizers or between subor- workplaces. A move to widen analysis of dinates) (Branch, Ramsay & Barker, 2007). It is also mobbing beyond workplaces has started, but possible to find mixed patterns, especially in “toxic needs to receive more attention.* organizations” (Dyck & Roithmayr, 2001), where c) The word “bullying” is used in Latin Ameri- these negative behaviors have become part of eve- ca and other Spanish-speaking countries to ryday life. refer to systematic collective aggressive be- , though not the first researcher havior between peers at primary and second- to address the phenomenon,† was the one who made ary schools, causing conceptual confusion it a paradigm in academic and therapeutic contexts. when bullying is used to refer to adult behav- Social and academic awareness of the prevalence ior in organizations. and importance developed from his work, starting in d) Mobbing is the term used worldwide except the Scandinavian countries (Matthiesen & Einarsen, by some English-language researchers. 2010). Leymann created an instrument to assess the presence of mobbing within organizations, based on It is important not to confuse mobbing with other the systematization of his therapeutic experiences. aggressive and emotionally abusive behaviors with-

† Carroll Brodsky (1976), author of The Harassed Work- * In Peña and Sánchez (2009) there are several examples er, is commonly referred to as the first researcher to deal of mobbing in various types of organizations. with the issue.

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 222 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

The Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terror mobbing techniques. There is a considerable overlap (LIPT) addresses 45 different behaviors, grouped between what happens in mobbing and suppression. into five categories: communication, social contacts, However, in some types of suppression, the tar- personal reputation, occupational situation, and get is not attacked personally, but his or her career is physical health (Leymann, 1990b). stymied. For example: A nurse says the hospital’s Although psychological approaches have estab- policy on washing hands should be better enforced, lished profiles for victims and perpetrators, “con- implicitly suggesting that some doctors are inadvert- spiratorial scenarios” can be created almost sponta- ently infecting patients. Later on, she is passed over neously.* Both mobbing and suppression have the for a higher position; an inconspicuous candidate, goal of socially eliminating something that makes less qualified and less experienced, is chosen in- perpetrators uncomfortable, whether the target is a stead. The nurse misses the opportunity but is not person or a set of ideas. Targets are considered a attacked in any other way. Suppression can apply to threat to vested interests and are turned into outcasts data and to ideas; some journals reject all submis- by manipulating information about them in a dis- sions on certain topics or that reach certain conclu- honest and questionable way. By definition, mob- sions. A dental journal, for example, might reject bing and suppression involve the use of unfair articles critical of fluoridation. No one is personally methods.† Therefore, suppression and mobbing have attacked, and the authors of the rejected articles ethical implications still to be addressed. However, might not even be aware of the cause of the rejec- suppression can be carried out by a single individu- tions – after all, lots of other articles on other topics al, it can happen in a single event, and the attacks are rejected too. In this scenario, there is no mob- can occur without targets being always aware of bing, but there is suppression of ideas. them. In cases of mobbing, a group performing the A pharmaceutical company can carry out numer- attacks has to be identified, and the attacks have to ous studies on a new drug, but only attempt to pub- be regular and prolonged; neither emotional abuse lish those studies that show the benefits of the drug by a sole perpetrator nor sporadically abusive events – studies showing harmful side effects are not sub- are considered mobbing. In mobbing scenarios, mitted for publication. The scientists working for the targets are always aware they are being isolated and company, or whose research is funded by the com- “hunted,” creating a chronic state of anxiety with pany, do not come under attack. Indeed, they may be very harmful consequences. receiving generous payments and other benefits for their research on the drug. But important data are Lessons from suppression to mobbing and from suppressed. mobbing to suppression The concept of mobbing focuses on individuals, As we have said before, in mobbing various main instigators, perpetrator teams and their targets, techniques are used to attack a target. This also hap- as well as their interactions and the means used to pens in suppression: a /discontented or a attack. It gives special attention to the effect of whistleblower is subject to reprisals, using many mobbing on organizations and the targets, such as adverse life, work and health consequences. The concept of suppression encourages a wider consid- * Between global markets, multinational corporations, eration of methods used against both individuals and national economic circumstances, the international divi- sion of labor, historic moments, international and national ideas. The implication is that when looking into transitions, expansion or shortage of employment, inter- problems within an organization, or more widely, it national and national policies, historical or changing is worth paying attention to a wide range of meth- structures of organizations, local cultures, multicultural ods, including ones not aimed at individuals, such as and multigenerational contexts, and personal biographies. † rejecting writing because of the ideas expressed. For example, circulating distorted information, exagger- ating or even inventing faults, making achievements The existence of suppression is often hard to invisible, spreading destructive gossip, denying tenure, prove because some of the methods used, such as promotions, publication, etc., and stigmatizing ordinary blocking appointments or denying funding, often actions.

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 223 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

occur for legitimate reasons. Therefore, criteria are overt suppression, because nothing needs to be done sometimes needed to assess whether suppression is in public, so there is no basis for complaint. involved, including timing (attacks start after speak- The idea of self- can be applied to ing out), double standards (others who did not speak mobbing. This generates the notion of “learned help- out are not attacked; ignoring or awarding the same lessness” – to avoid being mobbed, people become actions, depending on who performed them), and passive and cautious, even though no one else does patterns (there have been other similar cases in the anything threatening. Fearful of being attacked, same field). The same criteria can be useful for as- these people conform to what they think others sessing mobbing. In mobbing, due to the preparation want, take no initiative, give credit to others for their stage, targets are told implicitly they deserve what is own work, and even start behaving in a weak and being done to them and observers might sense pro- dependent way trying to always be “correct,” inad- cedures are being applied fairly because the target vertently giving power to the perpetrator team. has done something terrible. Targets and their sup- When regular sorts of mobbing occur, bystanders porters can use criteria (timing, double standards may become frightened that they will be similarly and patterns) to show that mobbing behaviors are targeted and start behaving in a frightened fashion to unfair and are being used for an unstated reason avoid being attacked. In this way, mobbing can in- (vested interests). Exposing vested interests can duce self-censorship and helplessness, just as sup- make it easier to build support from others who pression can stimulate self-censorship, preventing might be skeptical about mobbing claims. struggles against suppression and/or mobbing. Mobbing always involves degradation, namely words and behaviors that can induce feelings of Final remarks shame. Condescending remarks, spreading of ru- Literature about suppression and mobbing high- mors, abusive verbal attacks, and public criticisms lights several arenas where more attention, research can be understood as degradation rituals. Suppres- and action are needed. sion often involves degradation, but sometimes does 1. So far, mobbing has been addressed as a phe- not. For example, when well-qualified dissidents nomenon only happening in workplaces. There is apply for jobs, they may be rejected because they now strong evidence that it occurs in many other spoke out, but no public remarks are made about the organizations (Peña & Sanchez, 2009). reason for the rejection. Therefore, there is no deg- 2. Probably because of its subtleties, suppression is radation. Even the decision-makers may think they generally overlooked within organizations, which are being fair, because they are using selection crite- means low-key reprisals against the most vulnerable ria that value orthodox achievements; dissi- people may be invisible. There is a need to empha- dents/discontented simply do not measure up. The size these actions. lesson for the study of mobbing is that there can be 3. Diverse forms of attacks against individuals, systematic bias – suppression of certain ideas and ideas or suggestions in organizations interlink and people who express them – without anyone explicit- interact to protect vested interests. These connec- ly coming under attack. Everyone might feel the tions have been overlooked. For instance, suppres- system is okay, because no one is being humiliated, sion of dissent/discontent or reprisals against whis- yet dissent/discontent is quashed. tleblowers can be transformed into mobbing if the Finally, there is the idea of self-censorship in target resists (Bjørkelo, et al., 2008). A series of suppression. A person, aware that dissent/discontent suppression events directed at a single individual is risky, decides to stick to safe topics and cautious can constitute a type of subtle mobbing, and sup- comments. Sometimes this process is unconscious; pression might be also part of mobbing strategies. the person censors his own work and ideas and is 4. Because of the emphasis on perpetrators, targets not even aware he has done it. This can also be and actions, and their consequences on targets and called self-suppression. It is far more powerful than organizations, the vested interests behind the ag- gression remain comfortably hidden. These interests

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 224 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

and the groups that enforce them should become Einarsen, S. (1999). The nature and causes of bullying at part of the panorama of analysis and action against work. International Journal of Manpower. 20 (1/2): them. 16–27. 5. Suppression and/or mobbing can become the Einarsen, S., S. B. Matthiesen & A. Skogstad. (1998). Bullying, burnout and well-being among assistant organizational culture in toxic institutions, leading nurses, Journal of Occupational Health and Safety – to serious ethical, human rights, and health implica- Australia and New Zealand. 14: 563–568. tions. Einarsen, S., & B. I. Raknes. (1997). Harassment in the 6. Even if no one is being openly humiliated workplace and the victimization of men. Violence and (mobbed), if dissent/discontent are always squashed Victims.12, 247–263. to protect powerful cliques in an organization, basic Einarsen, S., & A. Skogstad. (1996). Bullying at work: rights can be systematically violated and profound Epidemiological findings in public and private organi- health problems created in silence. sations. European Journal of Work and Organiza- 7. Disagreement is a normal occurrence in human tional Psychology. 5: 185–202. interactions. Methods of dealing with it make the Glazer, M. G. & P. M. Glazer. (1989). The Whistleblow- difference between health-promoting environments ers: Exposing Corruption in Government and Indus- try. New York: Basic Books. and toxic ones. To build egalitarian, inclusive, dem- Goffman E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of ocratic and fair social systems linked to high levels Spoiled Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster. of quality of life, supportiveness and solidarity, the- Hein, S. (2006). Emotional abuse. Available at: se are not minor issues from a social medicine per- http://eqi.org/eabuse1.htm. Accessed August 30, spective. 2011. Kerfoot, K. (2008). Bossing or serving? How leaders References execute effectively, Medsurg nursing: official journal Bartlett, J.E & M.E. Bartlett. (2011). Workplace bullying: of the Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses. 17 (2): An integrative literature review, Advances in Human 133–134. Resources. 13 (1): 69–84. Krieger, N. (2011). Epidemiology and the People’s Bjørkelo, B., W. Ryberg, S. B. Matthiesen & S. Einarsen. Health: Theory and Context. New York: Oxford Uni- (2008). “When you talk and talk and nobody listens”: versity Press. A mixed method case study of whistleblowing and its Lahelma, E., T. Lallukka, M. Laaksonen, T. Partonen & consequences. International Journal of Organisation- O. Rahkonen. (2010). Consequences of workplace al Behaviour. 13 (2): 18–40. bullying for employee mental health problems. Epi- Branch, S., S. Ramsay & M. Barker. (2007). Managers in demiologia & Prevenzione. 34 (5–6, Supplement 1): the firing line: Contributing factors to workplace bul- 54. lying by staff – an interview study, Journal of Man- LeMoncheck, L. & J.P. Sterba. (2001). Sexual Harass- agement & Organization. 13 (3): 264–281. ment: Issues and Answers. Oxford: Oxford University Brodsky, C. (1976). The Harassed Worker. Lexington, Press. MA: D. C. Heath. Leymann, H. (1990a). Mobbing and psychological terror Cates, S. & S. Dorsey (2011). A self fullfilling prophecy? at workplaces. Violence and Victims, 5: 119–126. Discriminatory business practices or governmental Available at: victims in an analysis of Eeoc claims and their causal http://www.mobbingportal.com/leymannmain.html factors, Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learn- Accessed August 30, 2011. ing. 7 (1): 1-9. Leymann, H. (1990b). Presentation av LIPT-formularet. Dyck, D. & T. Roithmayr. (2001). The : Konstuktion, validering, utfall [Presentation of the Is your organization making workers sick? Benefits LIPT questionnaire. Construction, validation, meas- Canada. 25 (3): 52–55 urement]. Stockholm: Violen inom Praktikertjänst. Einarsen, S. (1996). Bullying and Harassment at Work: Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of Epidemiological and Psychosocial Aspects. Un- mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Or- published Doctoral Dissertation. Bergen, Norway: ganizational Psychology. 5(2): 165–184. University of Bergen. Leymann, H. & A. Gustafsson. (1996). Mobbing at work and the development of post-traumatic stress disor-

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 225 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012

ders. European Journal of Work & Organizational espacios laborales [Mobbing and health. Negative re- Psychology. 5 (2): 251–275. percussions in workers and workplaces], in: F. Peña, Lewis, D. (2004). Bullying at work: the impact of shame P. Ravelo & S.G. Sánchez (coordinators), Cuando el among university and college lecturers. British Jour- trabajo nos castiga. Debates sobre mobbing en nal of Guidance & Counselling. 32 (3): 281–299. México [When working punishes us. Debates about Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and …: Quitting mobbing in Mexico], Ediciones Eón y UAM- and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Azcapotzalco, México, y SEDISEM, Barcelona, Communication Monographs. 73 (4): 406–433. España, pp. 179–200. Martin, B. (1999a). Suppressing research data: Methods, Peña F. & S. G. Sánchez. (2009) (coordinators), context, accountability, and responses. Accountability Testimonios de mobbing. El acoso laboral en México in Research. 6: 333–372. [Mobbing testimonies. Workplace harasment in Martin, B. (1999b). Suppression of dissent in science. Mexico]. Ediciones y Gráficos Eón y ENAH-INAH- Research in Social Problems and Public Policy. 7: CONACULTA, México DF. 105–135. Suppression of dissent: documents. (2012). Available at: Matthiesen, S.T. & S. Einarsen (2010). Bullying in the http://www.bmartin.cc/dissent/documents/. Accessed workplace: Definition, prevalence, antecedents and January 3, 2012. consequences. International Journal of Organization Thérèse, S. & B. Martin. (2010). Shame, scientist! Deg- Theory and Behavior. 13 (2): 202–248. radation rituals in science. Prometheus. 28 (2): 97– Osborne, D. (2009). Pathways into bullying. Proceedings 110. of the 4th Asia Pacific Conference on Educational In- Vartia, M.A. (2001). Consequences of workplace bully- tegrity, Wollongong. Available at: ing with respect to the well-being of its targets and the http://ro.uow.edu.au/apcei/09/papers/18/. observers of bullying, Scandinavian Journal of Work, Pares, M. (2007). El lenguaje en el mobbing, in: F. Peña, Environment & Health. 27 (1): 63–69. P. Ravelo & S. G. Sánchez (coordinators), Cuando el Westhues, K. (2004). Workplace Mobbing in Academe: trabajo nos castiga. Debates sobre mobbing en Reports from Twenty Universities. Lewiston, NY: México [When working punishes us. Debates about Edwin Mellen Press. mobbing in Mexico], Ediciones Eón y UAM- World Health Organization (2002). World report on vio- Azcapotzalco, México, y SEDISEM, Barcelona, lence and health. Summary. Geneva: World Health España, pp. 80–97. Organization. Peña, F. & S. G. Sánchez (2007). Mobbing y salud. Repercusiones negativas en los trabajadores y en los

Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) - 226 - Volume 6, Number 4, May 2012