University of Huddersfield Repository McGregor, Frances-Louise When Is a Bully Not a Bully? A Critical Grounded Theory Approach to Understanding the Lived Experience and Organisational Implications of Being Accused of Being a Workplace Bully Original Citation McGregor, Frances-Louise (2015) When Is a Bully Not a Bully? A Critical Grounded Theory Approach to Understanding the Lived Experience and Organisational Implications of Being Accused of Being a Workplace Bully. Doctoral thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/26445/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ WHEN IS A BULLY NOT A BULLY? A CRITICAL GROUNDED THEORY APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING THE LIVED EXPERIENCE AND ORGANISATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF BEING ACCUSED OF BEING A WORKPLACE BULLY FRANCES-LOUISE McGREGOR A thesis submitted to the University of Huddersfield in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Professional Doctorate degree of Doctor of Business Administration The University of Huddersfield Submission date May 2015 Volume 1 of 3 Copyright statement i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns any copyright in it (the “Copyright”) and s/he has given The University of Huddersfield the right to use such copyright for any administrative, promotional, educational and/or teaching purposes. ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts, may be made only in accordance with the regulations of the University Library. Details of these regulations may be obtained from the Librarian. This page must form part of any such copies made. iii. The ownership of any patents, designs, trademarks and any and all other intellectual property rights except for the Copyright (the “Intellectual Property Rights”) and any reproductions of copyright works, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property Rights and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property Rights and/or Reproductions. 1 Abstract This research addresses the question “When is a bully not a bully?” through grounded theory using a purposive sample of volunteer participants who had been accused of workplace bullying. The aim of the study was to critically evaluate the lived experience and organisational implications of being accused of being a workplace bully, from the perspective of the (alleged) bully. The research did not set out to consider if an (alleged) bully had been guilty or innocent of the allegation put to them; it was considered that if this was deemed a criteria by the potential participant it may reduce engagement with the study. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge around the phenomenon of bullying and offers an insight into both research and further development of good organisational practice. Whilst the research on other parties involved in the issue and management of workplace bullying have developed, Einarsen (2014), Jenkins, Zapf, Winefield and Sarris (2012), Notelaers (2014) and Samnani and Singh (2012) express concern that research which explores and examines the perpetrator’s experience is scarce and needed as a priority in acknowledging the gap in current research and to develop a fuller understanding of the phenomena of workplace bullying. In a qualitative study with eight participants from a particularly difficult to access group, the researcher offers an early contribution to the current gap in literature, research and understanding of the perspective of the alleged workplace bully. Participants engaged in individual, confidential, unstructured interviews with the researcher and spoke candidly about their perceptions and the impact the accusation had on them. This was then analysed, evaluated and developed through a classical grounded theory approach to develop the theoretical model guilty until proven innocent. In discussing the participants’ concerns in this model, the research widened understanding and academic knowledge and narrowed the gap of information of the (alleged) bully’s perspective. In dealing with allegations, (alleged) workplace bullies identify with concerns of feeling bullied back, emotional reactions, self- coping mechanisms and managerial responsibility and action, from which the grounded theory guilty until proven innocent emerged. The main findings of the research emerged from the participant’s interviews; key highlights included being isolated by their organisations and subject to negative acts which would, in themselves be considered bullying behaviours. Participants then described how they would separate themselves from the organisation, despite feeling a sense of disconnected loyalty towards it. The structure of HR functions and the anti-bullying related policy had a significant influence on the negative treatment participant’s experienced, with a continual theme around the presumption the participant was guilty from the outset, by virtue of an allegation being raised. This perception was reinforced in the different way (alleged) bullies were supported and treated by their organisations from the claimants. The participants had been negatively affected by identifiable victim effect (Hamilton & Sherman, 1996), dispute-related claims (Einarsen, 1999; Keashly & Nowell, 2003) and the claimant being managed under a separate formal management procedure. The study also suggested that allegations of bullying could in themselves be a form of bullying and that there may be an element of discrimination in this on the grounds of protected characteristics. The main recommendations consider the structure of HR functions and the need for a visible and accessible personnel element necessary to begin to balance the support available for all 2 parties, including the alleged, the alleger, bystanders, witnesses, line managers, HR and investigation managers. Further research, which tests the grounded theory of guilty until proven innocent with larger samples will extend and develop this study and test some of the resolutions and solutions offered. 3 DBA Content Overview This submission for the University of Huddersfield Professional Doctorate, Doctor of Business Administration is presented in three volumes. Volume one is the thesis entitled “When is a bully not a bully? A critical grounded theory approach to understanding the lived experience and organisational implications of being accused of being a workplace bully”. Volume two is the personal and professional impact statement which provides a reflective piece which complements the contribution to knowledge and professional practice. In viewing the researcher’s professional doctorate journey from a reflective and reflexive position the impact statement focuses on research interests, personal and autonomous learning and the action learning approach which was a key part of the Doctor of Business Administration programme. Volume three presents the prepared, publishable journal article for The Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal which will be submitted post viva voce. The journal article is presented in Verdana 10 with APA 6th referencing in accordance with the publisher’s requirements. There is also an introduction which discusses the journal’s focus and relevance presented in this volume. 4 Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................... 2 DBA Content Overview ............................................................................................... 4 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... 5 List of Tables ............................................................................................................ 9 List of Figures ......................................................................................................... 10 Dedications and Acknowledgements ........................................................................... 11 List of abbreviations ................................................................................................. 12 Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................ 13 1.1 Chapter overview ............................................................................................ 13 1.2 Thesis overview – Section 1.............................................................................. 13 1.3 Rationale for the study – Section 2 ...................................................................