“You’re a bully!” An investigation into the impact of allegations of workplace bullying. (Dissertation) more

“You’re a bully!” An investigation into the impact of allegations of workplace bullying. Damian A. Stoupe A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements of the degree of Master of Science in the Graduate School of Education 2010 Word count: 14,989 © Damian Stoupe 2011 1 Abstract A small scale interview based study with defended subjects to investigate the impact of an accusation of workplace bullying in small businesses. Mimetic theory provided the framework for the analysis of the interviews. It considered the impact of the accusation and factors that influence the reaction including; childhood experiences of parental or school bullying, experiences of bullying in small businesses as recipient or accused, the role of insecurity, the mythology of bullying and bullying in small businesses. The findings suggest a four-phased dynamic response; Emotional, Expressive, Reflective and Adaptation, to any accusation. The study concludes that organisations should be aware of the potential impact accusations on future bullying episodes and the influence of mimesis on individual and group behaviours from the perspective of both those accused and the recipients of, bullying behaviours. Key words: workplace, bullying, organisation, mimesis, drama triangle, Girard, Oughourlian, victim, bully, mobbing, behaviours. © Damian Stoupe 2011 2 Acknowledgements The following study is the result of a team effort; there are so many people I would like to thank for their support and advice and inspiration, particularly to the participants whose generosity and openness was inspirational. Thank you all. Special thanks must go to my wife, Jane, without whose support none of this would have been possible. © Damian Stoupe 2011 3 Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................... 3 Structure of the dissertation ............................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1 - Introduction..................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Aims and objectives ................................................................................................................. 9 1.2 Emancipatory Research Framework ......................................................................................... 9 1.3 Personal context ..................................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2 - Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 12 Review of current workplace bullying literature ........................................................................... 12 2.1 What is bullying? ............................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Bullying is a community action .......................................................................................... 13 2.3 Mythology of bullying ...................................................................................................... 15 Introduction to Mimetic Theory ................................................................................................... 16 2.4 Mimetic Theory and Workplace Conflict............................................................................ 20 2.5 Working with the „bully‟ .................................................................................................... 21 Chapter 3 – Methodology ................................................................................................................ 23 3.1 Introduction to the methodology ............................................................................................ 23 3.2 Ethical Considerations ........................................................................................................... 25 3.3 The Hollway & Jefferson Methodology.................................................................................. 25 3.4 The investigative process ....................................................................................................... 26 3.5 The Participants ..................................................................................................................... 28 3.6 Data collection process issues ................................................................................................ 29 Chapter 4 – Results and Findings ..................................................................................................... 30 4.1 How would you react to an accusation of bullying? ................................................................ 30 4.2 Understanding bullying .......................................................................................................... 34 How would you define bullying? ............................................................................................. 34 The role of insecurity ............................................................................................................... 35 Images of bullies...................................................................................................................... 36 4.3 Past experiences of being bullied............................................................................................ 36 4.4 Bullying in small businesses .................................................................................................. 40 Summary of findings ................................................................................................................... 41 Chapter 5 - Discussion..................................................................................................................... 43 5.1 A phased response to accusations ........................................................................................... 43 © Damian Stoupe 2011 4 5.2 Mimetic Rivalry – a practical example ................................................................................... 46 M1 moves out of the cycle ....................................................................................................... 49 5.4 Revisiting the drama triangle.................................................................................................. 50 5.5 Concern for the Other ............................................................................................................ 51 Chapter 6 – Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 54 6.1 Implications ........................................................................................................................... 54 6.2 Further study areas ................................................................................................................. 55 6.3 Concluding statement............................................................................................................. 55 References....................................................................................................................................... 57 Appendix 1...................................................................................................................................... 62 Key Question ........................................................................................................................... 62 Responses from attendees ........................................................................................................ 62 © Damian Stoupe 2011 5 Table of Figures Figure 1: Different Expressions of Bullying ..................................................................................... 14 Figure 2: Mimetic Triangle ............................................................................................................. 17 Figure 3: Four Phased Response to Accusations............................................................................... 44 Figure 4: Responses to early life trauma (adapted from Oughourlian 1995) ..................................... 45 Figure 5: Karpman's Drama Triangle .............................................................................................. 46 Figure 6: An example of mimetic rivalry ........................................................................................ 48 Figure 7: The Mimetic Drama Cycle ............................................................................................... 53 Table 1: Background information on the participants ....................................................................... 28 Table 2: Comparison of outcomes of childhood bullying.................................................................. 39 © Damian Stoupe 2011 6 Structure of the dissertation Chapter 1 introduces the investigation which is positioned within an emancipatory framework; it includes the aims, objectives and a personal statement outlining the authors‟ personal experiences that have led to this research and any personal values that may have an impact on the findings. Chapter 2 develops the theoretical framework for this study from two perspectives; workplace bullying and mimetic theory. Literature on workplace bullying is plentiful but not in relation to mimetic theory, therefore a brief explanation of mimetic theory is followed by a discussion on how mimetic theory can support bullying research. Chapter 3 outlines the Hollway & Jefferson methodology used in this research process; chosen for its applicability in working with defended subjects. Chapter 4 identifies the findings in terms of key themes that emerged during the interview process. Chapter 5 discusses the findings in detail and develops a framework for understanding the reaction to the primary question of the study. The concluding chapter identifies both the implications of this study and potential areas for further research and summarises the investigation with a closing statement. © Damian Stoupe 2011 7 Chapter 1 - Introduction The impact on individuals, groups and organisations of workplace bullying has received a great deal of academic attention over recent years (Hoel & Giga, 2006) primarily utilising research from the „victims‟ perspective, identifying bullying behaviours and attempting to profile the „bullies‟. Little or no research has been undertaken with those who are accused of bullying. This has led to a gap in the knowledge base in workplace bullying (Westhues, 2008). How someone reacts to being accused of bullying behaviours is important due to the risk of future related violence. The accused may perceive themselves as a „victim‟; the anger or frustration they feel could be transferred to a third party (Oughourlian, 1995), who themselves may project their anger onto someone else at home or at school, thus creating a new cycle of violence. Mimetic theory offers a theory to explain conflict at different levels of society based upon the principle of imitation, or mimesis. Conflict is viewed by mimetic theory, as a process that results from individuals trying to prevent each other obtaining an object, (which may, or may not, be a physical object) that they both desire, reflecting issues of rivalry and jealousy which are common in bullying episodes. It also identifies a theory of scapegoating that could answer the two questions most often asked by recipients of bullying: „why me?‟ and „what did I do wrong?‟ This study suggests that individuals will respond to conflict by modelling their behaviours on those identified in other people, particularly those they are in conflict with. It will be argued that bullying is a learnt behaviour based upon both imitation and reward. The role of imitation is not disputed, it was clearly understood by the ancient Greeks (Aristotle, 350 BC), however, the primacy of imitation in our constitution, our essential being, is controversial (Fleming, 2008). © Damian Stoupe 2011 8 1.1 Aims and objectives The aims and objectives of this study are to:  Understand the impact of an accusation of bullying. This understanding will be determined by several factors including: o o what people understand by the word „bullying‟ how people react to the word „bully‟; what memories or experiences they have had of bullying  Explore the validity of applying mimetic theory to workplace bullying. To do this the study aims to: o o integrate mimetic theory with workplace bullying literature in the literature review analyse the findings of this study with specific reference to mimetic theory in particular the work of Jean-Michel Oughourlian o o  identify the way individuals imitate or model their behaviour on others understand the impact of the „victim-bully‟ Explore the possible similarities between an accusation of bullying to the actual impact of bullying:  Propose a possible framework for understanding the impact of accusations and bullying on the perpetuation of violence and offer a possible method of escaping the cycle of violence.  The final aim of this research is to offer a different perspective on the current approaches to workplace bullying; one which is more inclusive and is focused on reconciliation rather than confrontation. 1.2 Emancipatory Research Framework Oliver (2002) suggests, in his study on disability that researchers are not tackling „the objective structures of oppression‟ and as a result many disabled people are still positioned in an oppressive © Damian Stoupe 2011 9 way which results in „many disabled people [becoming] alienated from both the process and product of social research‟ (Oliver, 2002, p. 3). It is argued in this study that the „victim-centred‟ approach of current workplace bullying research is leaving those accused of bullying alienated, only one side of the story is being heard; the voice of the accused is often unheard. In previous workshops the awareness of people that they may be perceived as a bully has had an effect on the way they view themselves and others (Stoupe, 2008). It may also be responsible for the development of what is described as the „victim-bully‟ (Gunsalus, 2006) This approach needs to be addressed and as Oliver (2002) states: Research as production requires us to engage with the world, not distance ourselves from it for ultimately we are responsible for the product of our labours and as such we must struggle to produce a world in which we can all live as truly human beings. Thus the research act is not an attempt to change the world through the process of investigation but an attempt to change the world by producing ourselves and others in differing ways from those we have produced before, intentionally or not. (p. 14) Within this context and in view of the requirement that „emancipatory research must lead to changes, not act as an end in itself‟ (Toronto Group, 2005, p. 40), this study operates within a framework that is founded upon a belief that reconciliation is more likely to achieve a real and sustained reduction in workplace bullying than utilising conflict and blame. 1.3 Personal context In 2003 I was bullied at work, suffered with severe depression, and eventually took voluntary redundancy to begin a new career. As part of my „recovery‟ I developed an interest in workplace bullying. In the early days discussions I had with many charities supported my own belief that the recipient was always an innocent victim; as I had seen myself. I was secure in my own victim state. This view was challenged when I began delivering workshops and using my own case study, anonymously. I was quite surprised at the diversity of responses which ranged from outright sympathy © Damian Stoupe 2011 10 to outright blame. In response to this I looked at how I may have contributed to my own bullying experience, within a safe counselling environment, and it became obvious that I did actually have a role to play. About this time I began to read the works of René Girard and mimetic theorists, this opened up a new and deeper level of understanding about the role of desire, modelling and scapegoats which has resulted in this study and a personal desire to understand how we might move away from a focus on blame to one of lasting beneficial change. When discussing accusations of bullying so many people have stated that they were unaware of how their actions were being received. Anecdotal evidence, and my own experience, suggests that when an individual is confronted with their behaviour in what they perceive to be a genuine challenge, they will address the issues. Where they see the accusation as unfair a sense of humiliation is generated which needs to be addressed. The mimetic framework openly asks „do people really know what they are doing?‟ From this position I feel it is possible to move towards a framework of dealing with bullying that is based on reconciliation rather than vengeance. This study is a first step in that direction by allowing the voice of the bully within to be heard. Throughout this study I have tried to mitigate my own personal beliefs and how they surface in this research by using various counselling skills and practices, such as supervision, and interpersonal process recall; nevertheless, it is inevitable that some of my own values and beliefs will surface in this research. © Damian Stoupe 2011 11 Chapter 2 - Literature Review This literature review is divided in three main sections. The first explores what is meant by workplace bullying and the concept of bullying as a community action developed through imitated behaviours. The second provides an overview of mimetic theory and assesses the effectiveness of studying workplace bullying through a mimetic framework. The final section brings together research in the two areas and develops a framework which is used throughout this study. Review of current workplace bullying literature 2.1 What is bullying? There is no legal definition of bullying, however the Health and Safety Executive has identified bullying as a contributory factor in work-related stress (Health and Safety Executive, 2009). Many researchers have attempted to define bullying without success (Quine, 1999) (Giga, Hoel, & Lewis, 2008). Rayner & Hoel (1997) argue that there are inherent problems with defining bullying and it has been noted that definitions of bullying are subject to change over time (Westhues, 2008) and between different age groups (O'Moore, 2010). Hoel & Cooper (2000) found it difficult to determine what constituted a typical bully and found bullying behaviours were more likely to be indirect rather than direct acts. Rayner & McIvor (2006) found that, with the exception of physical or threatened acts of aggression, no agreement on bullying behaviours could be reached between their study groups and that „bullying could be defined in terms of the reaction of the target rather than individual behaviours‟ (p. 17). Others are more direct Field (1999) on his website states: Bullying is a compulsive need to displace aggression and is achieved by the expression of inadequacy (social, personal, interpersonal, behavioural, professional) by projection of that inadequacy onto others through control and subjugation (criticism, exclusion, isolation etc.) © Damian Stoupe 2011 12 Others argue simply that „...bullying is psychological violence, mostly covert and sometimes overt. It is psychological violence, both in its nature and impact‟ (Namie, 2003) or that it is „behaviour which does not give equal importance and respect to another person's feelings and experiences‟ (Queensland Govt., 2007). In the findings section we discuss a working definition provided and agreed by the participants of this study. Girard argues that by „fighting‟ the „bully‟ the recipient will intensify the cycle of conflict by modelling their behaviours, unconsciously, on those of the accused (Girard, 2010). By doing this the differences between the accused and the recipient will disappear to an observer but both involved parties will forcefully insist on their differences (Girard, 2010, p. 14). Girard suggests that each becomes a double of the other, seeking support from others with the aim of the „extermination of the other‟ (Girard, 2010, p. 15). In the workplace this „extermination‟ would be the expulsion of one or the other from the team or the business. Where the parties cannot destroy each other they would need to find a scapegoat onto which they could expend their frustration. Girard identifies this individual as the scapegoat, this individual will be chosen unconsciously and identified by the simple fact that they are different in some way. It is in the sacrificing of the scapegoat that the two parties will find a sense of calm - until their next conflict. (Girard, 1989). 2.2 Bullying is a community action The innocence of the scapegoat is important and needs to be taken into account, however, bullying is a multi-layered complex activity, involving people at all levels of the organisation and not a simple dyadic conflict (Stoupe, 2008). Figure 1 suggests a dynamic realtionship between expressions of bullying. Whilst there is a potential progression it is possible to move between the main positions with the exception of organisational bullying. The main progression begins with Accidental, to those who develop bullying behaviours to fit the organisational sub-culture. It also recognises that deliberate bullying does occur - albeit © Damian Stoupe 2011 13 irregularly. It also recgonises the role of the organisation in developing conflict and bullying behaviours (Jacoby, 2008) and the role of the victim-bully. In this way it supports the view that „bullying at work is far too widespread to be the work of a small number of pathologically disturbed individuals who can be removed from the workplace monitored or Accidental bullying Fear, personal history, lack of assertiveness /personal skills.. Victim bullying Stress, duress, performance targets, business climate... Organisational bullying Career bullying Performance issues, job protection ... Career development Organisational culture, rewards/ punishment, learnt behaviours Sociopathic bullying Figure 1: Different Expressions of Bullying controlled so as to prevent them from bullying‟ (Ironside & Seifert, 2003, p. 396). Cheyne (1998) argues that if we continue to focus on the direct aggression found in bullying relationships we will continue to misunderstand the phenomenon. To see behind the mask of bullying and recognise the role of reciprocity is important but it is equally important to pay attention to the role of the audience, who may be more important than the individuals involved. For example, the way a manager may act may be for the benefit of others in the team than it being a personal issue with the recipient. © Damian Stoupe 2011 14 A number of school based studies have found that aggressive behaviour is determined through observation and reward. Research (Bandura, 2003) suggests three important inputs into aggressive behaviour; parental coercion, behaviour being given a value and the examples set by other real, or fictional, role models. In other words, if a child sees a positive outcome to the use of bullying either by reducing the aggression they face or gaining from aggression, they will be more likely to use aggression in the future (Fox & Boulton , 2003) and, or, to satisfy their own desires (Tapper & Boulton, 2005) I have previously suggested (Stoupe, 2008) that these findings are equally applicable to the workplace with workplaces operating dual ethical cultures. The official culture emphasises the responsibility for others and the self and the unofficial culture that places the emphasis on self-interest (Roberts & Ziegler, 2007) the latter being reinforced by observation and the reward mechanism. This unofficial culture appears to edge towards an increased role for unhealthy competition (Grote & McGreeney, 1997) and eventually lays the foundation for mimetic rivalry and its subsequent consequences (Oughourlian, 1995) which, in my opinion, will express itself as bullying. 2.3 Mythology of bullying The popular language and imagery associated with bullying tends to be violence based. Some of the „self-help‟ books for „victims‟ of bullying continue this violence (Clifton & Serdar, 2000) (Field, 1996) (Graves, 2002). It is centred on a culture of blame, where the only acceptable outcome of blame is the sacrifice of an individual either the recipient or the accused, or sometimes a surrogate of the accused. In respect of the imagery a search on Google will provide plenty of images where the key element is the demonising of the bully such as can be found on the website sagrea.net (sagrea.net, 2008) These websites and books are encouraging people to fight back and place the blame on the shoulder of the accused. At the same time they are also reinforcing the weakness and shame of the recipient. This to me is institutional violence at a societal level. We appear to lack the vision to see another way out of the dilemma. The language used is loaded with violence and judgement; bully, perpetrator, © Damian Stoupe 2011 15 victim, target; all of which lead people to an emotional submissive or aggressive position, which I would argue leads to forms of externalised or internalised violence. Some authors from a Giradian perspective would find nothing new in this ((Bailie, 1995) (Alison, 2004) (Marr A. , 2007)) they would argue that this is all a result of mimetic desire and the scapegoat mechanism (Girard, 1989). Introduction to Mimetic Theory Mimetic theory was said to be rediscovered by René Girard following his research into some of the great authors such as Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare, Cervantes and Stendhal. He noticed the prominent role given to imitation in these literary works. He refers to this imitation using the Greek term mimesis. That we are imitative animals is not a new concept (Aristotle, 350 BC), where Girard departs from the norm is to state that desire is acquisitive (Girard, 2003, p. 283) in that we imitate the desire of others. He argues that imitation is not uniquely human, it can be found in animals but desire is „a distinctively human phenomenon‟ (Girard, 2003, p. 283). All animals have basic needs for food, hydration, shelter and rest, where humans differ is that these needs can be used as the foundation for desire but are not necessary for it (Oughourlian, 2010). Oughourlian (2010) states that desire is different from our needs but we tend to be unsure of the difference; he explains the difference by arguing that a need is biological (p. 28) as it emanates from within the entity. Desire is said to be a psychological movement which occurs between entities (p. 17) with a constant movement between suggestion and imitation which is able to change direction rapidly (p. 97). Desire is therefore an „act of the imagination‟ (Fleming, 2008, p. 11). The basic principle of mimetic desire is often shown as a triangle (Figure 2: Mimetic Triangle). The important element here is that the movement between model and subject is two way; the object is not desired for its own intrinsic value but rather because of the value it has to someone else, as a result, © Damian Stoupe 2011 16 desire cannot be described as autonomous. Object Imitation Model Subject Suggestion Closer the distance the greater the conflict. Figure 2: Mimetic Triangle In this way Oughourlian explains that we are constituted by the Other (one who is different to ourselves) even though we are blind to this understanding. Oughourlian (2010) provides a timeline to explain how this happens. He differentiates between real time (which moves forward) and psychological time (which moves backwards). It is through psychological time that we convince ourselves that we arrived at a desire before someone else; this is known as „seniority‟ (Oughourlian 2010). He uses the example of people falling in love with their best friend‟s girlfriend. We may have known the girlfriend for a long time but we become suddenly aware of how attractive she is when someone else dates her and then we are consumed with a desire for her because of her attractiveness to others. We then use psychological time to convince ourselves that we were always attracted to her. We then try and split the couple up causing conflict. This desire is then elevated to the position of a need. When the desire has been elevated to the status of a need, falsely, the model becomes the rival (Oughourlian, 1995). This competition, or mimetic rivalry, begins to lose its focus on the object and a personal rivalry develops in intensity and leads ultimately to conflict. The potential for conflict and its resulting intensity will increase with the © Damian Stoupe 2011 17 proximity of the model and the subject. An example often quoted is that of two young children in a room full of toys, invariably one child will wish to play with the toy the other child is playing with and trouble follows (Alison, 2004). In the workplace I would argue that as people move up the career ladder fewer jobs are available and the competition for those jobs intensifies. Bullying appears to express what may be seen as an intensification of the competitive process inherent in all human hierarchical structures (Marr A. , 2007). Advances in neuroscience suggest that there is hard evidence that the mimetic nature of desire is fundamental to our human nature (Melzoff, 2007). Work by Gallese and Rizzolati has focussed on the Mirror Neuron System (MNS) and its role in imitation. Gallese proposes that the MNS „is a good candidate for the sub-personal instantiation of what enables appropriative mimesis‟ (Gallese, 2009, p. 9). Appropriative mimesis being another way of saying that it is „a desire caused and/or intensified by the desire of another person for the same thing‟ (Marr A. , 2007). Garrels (2006) has demonstrated that neonates can differentiate between successful and unsuccessful operations carried out by adults. It is important as the research suggests that a baby is not only capable of imitating an action but that it can also imitate the intention of the adult. Alison (2007)points out that this means we desire according to the desire of the other and therefore from the earliest days of our lives we have a self that is totally relational. Oughourlian (2010) suggests that it is an error to see the „self‟ as the primary source of desire; rather it is desire that brings the self into existence. In this way mimetic theory argues that we can be described as interdividual rather than individual (Girard, 2003). Our desires, hopes and fears are built upon relationships with others, through the mechanism of suggestion and imitation, which we subsume into ourselves to the point where we believe the suggestions originate from within. The advertising industry has used this process effectively (Berry, 2008). © Damian Stoupe 2011 18 The link between mimetic theory and bullying can be developed in line with Oughourlian‟s view that, from a psychotherapeutic perspective, rivalry is the clinical expression of mimetic desire and its outlets are though jealousy, greed and envy (Oughourlian, 1995). There are criticisms of mimetic theory that need to be addressed, most relate to the theological underpinnings of the work. For the purposes of this study one of the most important criticisms centres on the perception that mimetic theory and Girard in particular, reduces human interaction to a form of hidden violence (Schwager, 2000) focussing on the role of violence and does not propose a mechanism for human cooperation (Townsley, 2003). Millbank argues that Girard has placed desire and violence as ontologically necessary, thereby placing violence at the heart of human culture leading to a situation whereby there is no possibility of a nonviolent society (Depoortere, 2008). Milbank further argues that Girard, whilst pointing out the flaws in the societal structure, does not provide a concrete alternative. Girard has not argued that mimetic desire is essentially negative; he posits that it can also be positive as evidenced by the theory being applied to the development of frameworks for reconciliation and a non-violent response undermines this criticism. (Townsley, 2003). There are I would argue valid criticisms about Girard‟s methodological approaches, nevertheless a great deal of research in many different subject areas is on-going and being carried out to a high standard. Any theory, however, will be reliant on others to prove or disprove over time (Schwager, 2000). This study in looking at the role of mimetic theory in workplace bullying is one test of the applicability of how Girard understands desire and its impact on violence at work. A final criticism worth tackling is that mimetic theory has been centred on Christianity. Girard has never hidden his faith; it was through his research that he developed his faith. There is also an ongoing dialogue between mimetic theologians and Islamic scholars developing a common ground and understanding (Ericksen, 2009). I would also suggest that if one explores the writings of Ghandi one would see similar viewpoints for example in his expression of non-violence through the practice of ahimsa (Gandhi, 2007). © Damian Stoupe 2011 19 2.4 Mimetic Theory and Workplace Conflict Research by Baillien et al (2005) and Neyens et al (2005) (cited in Bailllien et al (2007)), have shown empirical links between conflict and workplace bullying. Baillien et al (2009) identified three causes of workplace bullying, which I would suggest support the Girardian understanding of conflict, namely an individuals‟ inability to deal with frustration, escalating conflict and finally, team and organisational cultures. Competition itself is not negative, what is negative is where the focus becomes the destruction of the rival and not the attainment of the object. Baillien (2009) suggests that where an individual‟s desires are not met then conflict will develop thereby increasing the risk of conflict. Oughourlian (1995) argues that unless violence can be addressed at the actual moment of conflict the „energy for that retaliation is saved up for later use … it produces all kinds of psychopathological symptoms and shapes the life and destiny of the frustrated avenger.‟ (Oughourlian, 1995, pp. 44-45). He adds that the level of vengeance stored up is dependent upon the humiliation felt and that this „deferred violence‟ will intensify over time. This can be viewed in two ways, firstly as a feeling of hatred and/or secondly as a drive; „a compulsive desire to destroy which will animate the offended and organise all his efforts in view of the vengeance that will set him free‟ (p. 44). The drive may be directed at the individual concerned or at others, possibly imitating previous bullies behaviours to avoid being bullied again (Leea & Brotheridge, 2006). Fetherstone (2000) argues that we should begin to take account of what he describes as the „objective base of conflict – unfulfilled human needs [desires]‟ when dealing with conflict resolution rather than focus on importance of relationships and perceptions. The move from subjective to objective criteria will provide a way ahead that is achievable for both parties. From personal experiences of working with bullies and victims, the greatest impact of bullying is found in the sense of humiliation and the exposure to our own weaknesses. It is in the feeling of powerlessness to respond to an attack, actual or perceived, that we experience the attack even more. © Damian Stoupe 2011 20 Oughourlian appears to emphasise that there must be an actual physical experience; I would suggest that the perception of humiliation is equally likely to trigger this sense of trauma as any physical act. The stored energy, referred to above, could be focussed inwards, through low self-esteem, self-hatred and expressed through self-harm or depression. It may also provide a competitive motivation. Initially this may appear to be a positive force, as in the case of objective competition such as gaining promotion. Where the competition is against a specific individual then it is deemed subjective and this leads to competitive subjective rivalry; which may be expressed as a desire to dominate or control another person. In becoming personal, subjective, battles, the risk is that we are immediately transferred back into the original experience and re-live those feelings of humiliation, shame and anger again. It is my contention that there is a danger in accusing people of bullying that we may trigger this mimetic cycle, leaving people feeling weak, humiliated and angry. Their response would be to seek vengeance on others, at work or at home. 2.5 Working with the ‘bully’ I am unsure as to whether the majority of bullying situations are a deliberate action. I would suggest that by humiliating the accused we may actually be developing future problems, possibly even leading an individual into developing bullying behaviours in other areas of their life such as at home, as a means of expending their mimetic energy on another. Mimetic theory places an emphasis on the lack of knowledge that we have in respect of other people‟s actions and the limited use of the role of blame (Alison, 2004). To understand what is happening in bullying events we need to be aware of what drives an individual to behave in a certain manner, either from their personal background, or from their working environment. Girard argues that we must be prepared to challenge situations where we recognise scapegoating occurring (Girard, 1989), but what he is very explicit on is that these events are unconscious; it is not for us to therefore pass judgement but to seek to help. Alison would argue that this is difficult when we exist in a culture which is dominated by an atonement theory which seeks vengeance; an eye for © Damian Stoupe 2011 21 an eye (Alison, 2004). He argues that we need to move towards a recognition that we are infinitely beloved (Thorne, 2004) and are required to have an infinite responsibility for others (Levinas, 1996) to see behind the „face‟ and what is instantly recognisable. This way we may reduce the humiliation that the Other feels and therefore reduce the „desire‟ for conflict. Levinas (2008, 2009) challenges the trend to focus on self, in terms of identity and ego, to focus on a priority of ethics in relation to others (Matthews, 2006) what Levinas actually does is provide an argument for prioritising the duty of care which we have both to and for others (Manderson, 2006). He argues that ethics is the „first philosophy‟, that without ethics there would be no society, this relationship with the other goes beyond comprehension and can only be brought into being through communication, primarily through the use of images or what he calls „expression‟ (Levinas, 1996). This challenges the trend for people to have a „duty to be tolerant towards the Other by not getting too close which he says results in the right not to be harassed, which is a right to remain at a safe distance from others‟ (Zizek, 2009, p. 35) whilst inherently denying the interdividuality, or mutual dependency, of our nature that the we are the Other; arguably denying our very existence (Girard, 2003). In this way the centring of our ethics on others reflects the primacy of the Other as constitutional to ourselves (Oughourlian, 1995). In terms of this study, mimetic theory, informed by the work of Levinas, provides an approach which allows for uncertainty from which we can begin to learn rather than defining an absolute and seeking to prove its existence. Knowledge in this way becomes a lived experience which is based upon a precept that good exists beyond being. © Damian Stoupe 2011 22 Chapter 3 – Methodology This chapter focuses on which methodology was chosen for the study and the reasons for that choice. It also highlights the ethical issues relating to working with defended subjects and with potentially distressing issues. Finally, it introduces the participants and some of methodological issues raised during the investigative process. 3.1 Introduction to the methodology To understand why people react as they do to accusations of bullying it is important to understand some basic concepts from their perspective:    What do they understand by the term „bully‟ or „bullying‟? What do they consider to be bullying behaviours? How would they react to an accusation of bullying? The questions are important as they begin to explore what may be described as the gestalt, or world view of the individual. From my experiences people begin bullying discussions with the statement “when I was bullied by…”, very few open a discussion with the statement “when I bullied …” For this study it was important to ensure that the interviewees felt comfortable enough to lower their barriers and explore what can be deeply personal and traumatic experiences and to feel safe enough to explore their role in the events. In researching a methodology I was drawn to the work of both Maxwell (1996)and Hollway & Jefferson (2009). Maxwell proposes an interactive research design which provides a fluidity that allows for movement which, in a sense, creates a tension; it does not prescribe that elements of design must follow a specific planned path but movement is allowed between elements. One of the first decisions taken in respect of the methodology was to use a quantitative or qualitative approach. There are sound methodological reasons for choosing a quantitative approach but I was also aware that the majority of current research into workplace bullying has been developed using © Damian Stoupe 2011 23 quantitative techniques. Westhues (2008) argues that this emphasis has impeded research into the subject, as it has not effectively challenged the answers provided by participants. In fact he argues that the methodologies used have actually precluded challenges to the received answers stating that the „most common research method, the questionnaire survey, puts too much trust in the alleged victim‟s viewpoint, which is in fact no more trustworthy than the alleged perpetrator‟s‟ (Westhues, 2008, p. 7). This concern is echoed by Hollway and Jefferson (2009) who state that the: ‟tell it like it is‟ approach ... eliminates any meaningful distinction between description and theoretical interpretation ... this commitment would tend ... to echo [the participants] own one-sidedness‟ „traditional survey research is ... is based on a series of unwarranted methodological and theoretical assumptions ...that can be accessed through one hypothetical closed question. (p. 58) They suggest that any research process that does not examine the meanings offered to the researcher, whether through quantitative or qualitative methods, should not be believed. The aim of this research was to be able to move behind what the interviewee initially offered and to explore what lies behind the presented mask. In my opinion, not to „steadfastly look at the data in a scientific way, from all sides and angles‟ (Westhues, 2008, p. 8) which includes looking at contexts and meanings would, in a sense mean colluding in the current dyadic perception of bullying (Cheyne, 1998) and ignoring the more fluid, dynamic and cultural elements. This study does this through a lens which attempts to clarify the psychological roots of politics and society provided by Girard (Bellinger, 2006) using mimetic desire and the scapegoat mechanism (Girard, 1989). Storied qualitative techniques can be used in a sensitive and skilled way to help a participant safely lower their mask. As a counsellor I am very aware that the initial presented story is incomplete; we have a tendency to offer a defended self to others and other people cannot be totally known (Hollway & Jefferson, 2009), (Levinas E. , 1996). We often try and avoid areas that cause us pain or anxiety © Damian Stoupe 2011 24 (Hollway & Jefferson, 2009), thus I feel it is necessary, as I would in a counselling session, to develop a relationship of trust which will enable them to allow me to hear the real story. This research will not prove that the anecdotal evidence is „right‟ but O'Byrne (2007) states that the „goal is not to prove knowledge but, rather, to produce knowledge that can serve as a building block until it is disproved.‟ This building block will facilitate others to develop their own understanding and adapt or change these findings as appropriate. 3.2 Ethical Considerations As previously stated, this research required the development of trust and rapport between the researcher and the interviewee. The issue of confidentiality was paramount for all the participants. Asking people to relate stories in which they share their own weaknesses and discuss how other people impacted upon them meant the participants were taking a risk that they may be identified at a later date. Working with them to ensure their anonymity, allowed the research to move into areas that otherwise the participants may have been unwilling to move into particularly in respect of their own actions. I ensured that participants had access to a network of counsellors should they have required any assistance due to the issues that nay have been raised. In this piece of research there was an awareness that informed consent was necessary, however to have provided full details of all the questions would have seriously impacted on the data collection task as individuals may have prepared their answers beforehand. For this reason the participants were given an overall understanding of the substantive topic but were not provided with details of the questions to be asked. 3.3 The Hollway & Jefferson Methodology Hollway & Jefferson (2009) use what they describe as a „free association, narrative and the interview method‟ which is very similar to the approach I take in my counselling practice. It was important for © Damian Stoupe 2011 25 developing rapport that the methodology was one in which I myself felt comfortable and able to help develop a rapport with the participant over the two sessions. This methodology enables the research to be used as a learning experience not just for the researcher and reader but also, importantly, for the participant. It was important that, using an emancipatory approach, the participant should gain from the experience also. I am unsure what they would gain from a single fifty minute interview, having the opportunity to receive a transcript of the session and meet up for a second interview and to revisit any of the topics that were of interest to either of us, seek clarifications or simply to look at what they may have learnt proved, to be beneficial. It was a time consuming process for both parties but it provided me with a more accurate reflection of their thoughts and provide me with an opportunity to move beyond the „face‟ and obtain a glimpse of their true desires. 3.4 The investigative process 1) Ten volunteers were invited to interview: a. Research suggests that one in ten people in the workplace are bullies, therefore selecting 10 people there was a possibility that I would find a „bully‟ in the target group. b. The participants came from a small business community in Somerset; owners and employees from businesses with fewer than 25 employees which represents 40% of the local working population (Somerset County Council, 2001). I chose this group as I am aware that much has been written about the lack of workplace bullying issues in small businesses, however, anecdotal evidence suggests that this is not the case. Also owners and employees of small businesses do not generally have formal management training programmes focussing on behaviours; therefore, I feel that this will allow me to observe more „organically‟ developed behaviours. 2) I used the Hollway and Jefferson (2009) method for interviewing defended participants this meant: a. Using open questions © Damian Stoupe 2011 26 b. Eliciting the participants stories c. Avoiding asking „why‟ in response to their stories d. Following respondents ordering and phrasing e. It was a semi-structured interview in the sense that I had three specific questions I needed answering during the interview; however, it was a free discussion moving with the participants answers to gain the most insight. This opened up other areas for discussion. 3) I aimed to transcribe the interview and return the transcript to the participant within 3 days. The aim here was: a. To ensure the participants had a record of what was said so they could review and comment b. To eliminate my own bias, I was able to discuss with the participant what I interpreted them as saying. 4) I also aimed to re-interview the participant within seven days. 5) The data was then analysed and was influenced by the following: a. What direct observations can be taken from the discussion? In other words what did I notice about what was offered in the interview. b. Why did I notice these things? In this instance, I used reflexivity as a tool through the medium of the Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR) Model (Kagan, 1980) to help me understand what was happening during the research process, this will also acted as an internal check on the validity of the research. c. Using IPR I also helped to provide internal validity (Roberts B. , 2002) and raise to my conscious awareness my own judgements. It was also useful to take the outcome of the IPR to my counselling supervisor to eliminate further bias from the process. d. In interpreting the data I used a psychosocial lens heavily influenced by mimetic theory and particularly the work of Oughourlian influenced by Levinas. In any qualitative research method there will be a question over both the reliability and validity of the research as we are dealing with unique individuals with experiences that are unique to them. © Damian Stoupe 2011 27 Maxwell refers to validity as the „correctness or credibility of a description, conclusion, explanation, interpretation, or other sort of account‟ (Maxwell, 1996). Kohler Riessman argues that the ultimate test of validity is whether the „research becomes a basis for others‟ work.‟ (Kohler Riessman, 2008), in other words is the research pragmatic. As this appears to be a new area of study I am aware of this requirement. 3.5 The Participants Table 1 below identifies the volunteers who had expressed an interest in assisting this enquiry. To ensure anonymity they are identified by a code which simply refers to gender and the order they Name Age range Gender Job role Bullied at work Bullied at school Bullied at home Accused of bullying M1 M2 F1 M3 F2 M4 F3 M5 F4 <30 >30 <30 >30 >30 <30 >30 >30 >30 Male Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Employee Employee Employee Owner Manager Employee Owner Manager Owner Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Did not proceed F5 >30 Female Owner No No No Yes Did not proceed Table 1: Background information on the participants © Damian Stoupe 2011 28 were interviewed. The choice of the age range as </> 30 years old is arbitrary to provide a rough guide to ages without enabling any further ability to assume specific ages and identify individuals. The individuals come from a range of small business settings and occupy different potions in those settings. 3.6 Data collection process issues  I originally intended to interview 10 people, however interviewees 9 and 10 did not take part in the full interview because: o Interviewee 9: During the initial session it was felt that the issues being raised were too traumatic for her to take part in the research process and it was recommended that she seek professional counselling assistance to help her deal with bullying that she had received at work. o Interviewee 10: Decided, for personal reasons, to withdraw from the process before the interviews began  To identify two more participants I approached several local small business organisations; such as the local and county Chambers‟ of Commerce and the regional Federation of Small Businesses with no success. I therefore decided to carry on the research process with 8 volunteers.  The research presented here comes from three sources. The primary source is the responses to the interviews undertaken as part of this research. The secondary source in respect of triangulating the findings will be from feedback from questions asked at workshops on workplace bullying undertaken in larger organisations. The third corner of the triangle, in a sense will be obvious from the elements I choose to share. This in essence means understanding why I notice what I notice in this respect and therefore I will be offering a reflexive view. © Damian Stoupe 2011 29 Chapter 4 – Results and Findings This chapter focuses on the actual findings of the study in order to answer the study question and offers possible evidence to suggest that an accusation of bullying will bring back into awareness childhood experiences of bullying, issues of insecurity and confidence along with the mythology of bullying. It will also offer evidence that bullying in small businesses is a problem that needs to be researched more fully. 4.1 How would you react to an accusation of bullying? All the interviewees used the label „bully‟ freely; however, the discomfort of being faced with their own „bully‟ was evident in all. The logical vocalised response was for them to ask for more information about the accusation; however, all the interviewees stated that they would experience discomfort at the accusation, if not outright anger. M2 summed his position up by saying that: I'd get upset and when I get upset I tend to become hostile and it kind of cements the persons view in that it gets me down, you kind of feel like you‟ve fallen into a trap, you trap yourself, “no I'm bloody not grrrr" get cross about it and all of a sudden you‟re using language and actions that are just confirming that persons point of view… M2 said this reaction related past events where he had felt „stress and upset‟ at his sisters constant accusations of bullying alongside his mother‟s identification of him with his father, who M2 perceived as a physical bully. M1 initially stated that he would ask why they thought that however, when challenged to identify the instant gut reaction he said that his first, almost instinctual response, would be to say a very strong „Fuck off… sort of defending myself.‟ M1 said that reaction was due to his unwillingness to be seen as the playground bully. © Damian Stoupe 2011 30 M3 admitted to being „shocked‟ and exceptionally defensive about such an accusation. He knows that he manages people „strongly‟ and „drive[s] people and [he] will get the best out of people.‟ He would want to know „why, because I would want to make it totally clear in my own mind and in theirs whether it was bullying, or strong management.‟ M3 is aware of the concept of victim-bullying and: …when you talk it through its not bullying, it‟s the fact that someone is trying to make sure you do your job...and when you look at it actually what they‟ve been given is just their work. So I think there is a percentage of people who will say, for their own benefit, “I‟m being bullied” … I think there‟s an awful lot of that [victim bullying] in the workplace, where it‟s you can get the boss to back off me. “I don‟t want to do any more work and he‟s now given me more work.” There is a sense of relativity about whom it is that makes the accusation. M5 said that he: would feel I wasn‟t trying to be a bully and I was, and I had actually been a bully and someone‟s telling you and confronting you with that… if you‟re a bully and you‟ve been behaving in a way that is bullying to them I wouldn‟t mean to do that. It would be the last thing I would want to do would be to upset people and force them to do that. However, he also felt that his reaction would be determined by the relative power and state of the existing relationship: if it had been one of those people who had approached me in an aggressive way I would have felt quite intimidated by it and would have probably felt a little bit like my father or mother telling me off… If it had been one of the very young people I‟ve had working for me then it would probably have been a little like one of my kids telling me off and it‟s a very different sort of relationship then. If it had been … a colleague …then … it would have been a little bit probably more hard to deal with. Because when you‟ve got somebody on the same level as you telling you you‟re doing something wrong, then you‟re, it actually feels more of a harsh © Damian Stoupe 2011 31 criticism than maybe a father figure or a son or daughter figure because you can start … it‟s easier to take advice from an older father figure than it is a younger person… If you get feedback from a younger person you can say “ah, well they don‟t really they‟re not experienced.” I listen to them but I don‟t have to take it so seriously, they‟re lower in the pecking order than me. If he was accused in a strong manner: “if someone had come to me and made a serious complaint in what I would term probably more of an aggressive manner “you‟re a control freak, you‟re a bully and you‟ve got a … “ and that sort of attack on myself, then I would be, that relationship with that person would probably be badly affected. Now, if … my perception of that person was not very good already it would probably destroy it. A good relationship you would end up with a sort of a fairly cold relationship. Although he had never been accused of bullying he had been called a „control freak‟ and thought he might react in a similar way. His instant reaction, to a member of staff, was to dismiss the comment „Oh, she‟s bonkers anyway.‟ Later he reflected on the comments and ultimately accepted he was a „control freak.‟ F2 was different to the extent that her initial reaction was to accept the accusation and turn it in on herself saying „Oh my god, what have I done… how terrible of me.‟ She would then examine the evidence. In the past when she had done this she had always found that she was „just standing up for [herself].‟ Although it still left her feeling a little nervous around that individual. In a similar way F3 felt that the accuser would be wrong in their assessment, „what‟s that all about then? You‟d better explain that if you‟re going to call me that‟ and that she would be „doing her job‟ and being „assertive, but people can‟t cope with that.‟ Like M3 she would listen to and explore the accusation with the recipient but seemed to be aware of the degree to which people can use the © Damian Stoupe 2011 32 accusation as a form of self-defence. Her response would be governed by her relationship. Following a challenge, she said it would upset her, but she „would never show it in work.‟ She would take it home and discuss it with her partner. M4 felt that he would be upset „because ... I don‟t like to think of myself as a bully… I just, the thought of me excuse me, forcing my issues, my issues, on to other people for no apparent reason ... is just awful.‟ This was based upon his previous experiences of being bullied; he would not want someone to feel the same way. During the course of the interview M4 was shocked to realise he had unwittingly bullied someone. He outlined the story: [the recipient] was getting in with others so well and so quickly when I had been around for so long chipping away at it but I … came to terms with it, I came up with reasons why I was in the situation I was in, and he just blew that away, and proved that that wasn‟t the case, … and that really upset me and I didn't like him. I really didn‟t like him. I didn‟t speak to him all that much was quite cold with him, I am not sure he knew that, but in that sense I was bullying him. …I don‟t know how I would take it [an accusation of bullying by the recipient], I don‟t want to tell him the reasons behind it because that‟s too upsetting…, there's almost a sense of shame in there again, a sense of weakness of not being able to deal with something yourself. The findings suggest that how people understand the term bully is important to understanding the above reactions. I have identified those elements in the discussion that begin to explore the development of their understanding which must include their experiences of the word. © Damian Stoupe 2011 33 4.2 Understanding bullying How would you define bullying? The participants defined bullying in terms of issues surrounding power and control which was expected. Together we used information from the first round of interviews to develop up a working definition of bullying which they found useful: One person, the accused, using their power aggressively, as a means of self -defence, to impose their will over, and take advantage of, someone else; by means of excessive or continual pressure thereby controlling the recipient‟s environment. Two aspects of the definition surprised me. Firstly, M4 said „…it‟s funny; aggression is the best form of defence …‟ Asked to expand on this he said that bullies: „are very uncomfortable in their surroundings and so they're using aggression to stake themselves in a form of bullying … its insecurity, it‟s down to insecurities not being comfortable with who they are and the people they're around with‟ In a sense M4 identified very clearly many of the distinguishing features of bullying; aggression, environment, insecurity, self-defence and self-identity; all these features were brought out in the other interviews. F2, however, identified two different types of bullying; one physical and masculine, the other feminine and emotional. She had experienced masculine bullying in the 1980‟s she was clear “I saw it as bullying straight off … because they made no secret about it if you confronted them they would just go “Yeah, deal with it” and that then you‟ve got all the anger and emotion but also powerlessness.” She believed that there has been a shift in recent years towards a more indirect feminine emotional approach. This is an area which is of interest but falls outside of the scope of this study. © Damian Stoupe 2011 34 The role of insecurity M3 placed a great deal of emphasis on the word confidence and its synonyms. He mentions confidence eight times in his interview, he stated that: „You don‟t have to be a victim; you don‟t have to be a bully. You‟re not born to it. And I think your personal confidence is important… The bully and the victim are people who lack the confidence. They‟re actually very similar; they‟re just displaying it in different ways‟ M4 only used two words to sum up his view of bullying; “the fear, the insecurity” which arose from his own experiences at school and at home. F1 raised issues of people bringing events into the workplace from outside, „I would say she is very frustrated with her life and when she comes in to work and things are not going how she wants it to go she goes absolutely crazy‟ F3 feels that bullying is all about people‟s lack of confidence in themselves and the situation they are handling. For example, she spoke about issues at work where people respond negatively to being challenged as they may not have the experience or knowledge of the topic „as a result they become defensive and attack other people.‟ It is also expressed in situations where people „march up and down the office telling people to “just do what I say” without allowing any discussion on the topic for fear of being proved wrong.‟ F3 suspects that: it just comes down to people not liking being told what to do‟ because …if they are unsure of what they are doing then they tend to focus on subjective things; if they are sure about what they are doing they can afford to be objective because they cannot easily be threatened. Appendix 1 provides details of the responses to these questions from workshop attendees that also reflect how important the issue of confidence is. © Damian Stoupe 2011 35 Images of bullies For the participants the bully is someone who is „big and brash‟ (M4), arrogant and struts around (M1) and a „picture of somebody at school‟ (M5). This playground image appears to be very strong and tends to relate to personal experiences of the playground and childhood for all but two of the participants: „a picture of somebody at school … making somebody‟s life a misery and aggressively attacking somebody but not in a, not physically injuring them but doing stuff that‟s near as bad without leaving a mark. Say bullying in the workplace gives you a picture of somebody who‟s doing something that steps over the line and is actually having real physical harm to someone and harm to their emotions‟ (M5) 4.3 Past experiences of being bullied I think the above stances can only be understood properly when the past experiences of the individuals can be brought into focus; these stories come from their own histories of childhood and work. For this reason I have divided this section into two focussing on childhood and adult work. Impact of childhood bullying I have deliberately chosen to use the term childhood bullying to take into account what was offered by the interviewees that bullying does not just take place in school in the early years it also occurs in the home. Bullying at Home M3, M2 and M4 all stated that they were bullied by their fathers, M2 and M3 both experienced physical bullying from their father whilst for M4 it was psychological. M4 and M2 still regard their fathers as their role model while M3 looked outside of his immediate family to his grandfather and sports teacher to provide positive role models for him. © Damian Stoupe 2011 36 M4 defended his father‟s actions by stating that „when he was doing it, it was coming from a lot of love but at the end of the day (pause) ... he was bullying me…he didn‟t realise he was doing it ...he was coming from a loving place…he didn‟t realise‟ M2 was also subject to bullying by other members of his family; „I describe my mother as a psychological assassin. I couldn't talk to her without; I suppose feeling psychologically bullied by her without thinking that my views and feelings weren't justified.‟ He added that „my sister used to bang out the word all the time to the point where someone else could use the word she's bullying me in a way.‟ Bullying at School With the exception of F2 and F3, the interviewees referred back to being bullied at school. The reason for this bullying can be broken down into several distinct areas:     Intelligence (M2, M3, M4) Looks (M3, M2, M4, F1) Family background (M3, M2) Clothes (M3) M3 summed up the impact by stating that: “I can remember being bullied at school as a youngster and the bullying at school related to the fact that, height for one. I was always taller than everybody else, so you stuck out like a sore thumb. And I came from a family that didn‟t have an awful lot of worldly wide goods, so I would have to have the hand me downs. I was fourth down the line so by the time it got to me it didn‟t look very clever. So you stuck out. You stuck out in what you were wearing and I stuck out from the crowd because of the height I was.” He continued by saying: © Damian Stoupe 2011 37 “…the effect it had on me; I didn‟t want to go to school… I wouldn‟t do all sorts of things because of the bullying. So you start to mould your life around that of the bullies and that‟s where I say … certainly for a while as a kid it dominated and controlled a lot of my life.” For M4: “I wasted my education. Because of that [bullying]. I didn‟t go to school... I‟m lucky that, how I got the grades that I did I‟d always try to find excuses to try and get out of school always quite always talk myself out of things … so I‟m quite upset I didn't I didn‟t get the education I deserved and that I could of got because of it.” For F1: “I remember in school because that is the one thing I do always remember. They always said I had footballer legs because I always had big calves… it used to drive me crazy” Impact of Childhood bullying The sense of powerlessness or weakness felt by the interviewees during their bullying experience is profound. The emotional expression of this weakness, I would suggest, is humiliation. This can be seen in the interview with M4 who says: “I was shameful about ... yeah... it‟s quiet an embarrassing thing ... being bullied ... it shouldn‟t be, but it is … I didn‟t tell anybody ...the only person that knew was me and the, and the bully … its testosterone, isn‟t it? It‟s the male thing…just not being able to deal with it yourself, that‟s quite a shame” Initially M4 said that by being accepted by individuals into a larger group this sense of shame had been extinguished; however responding to a challenge he said that „maybe it still affects me but I am able to deal with it a lot more efficiently and therefore, it‟s not an issue in my life now [however] there is still probably fear that it would happen again‟ which leads M4 to be quite guarded with those © Damian Stoupe 2011 38 he does not know very well; being accepted is a really important way of counteracting those feelings for him. As stated previously, people who are able to address the shame of bullying suffer no lasting effects to their self-esteem or confidence levels by either retaliating or moving on, if they do not Oughourlian (1995) suggests that the energy generated will be stored up for later use in the form of hatred, in its most extreme guise or as a motivator for overcoming „enemies‟. M2 It became very difficult to talk about anything my emotions took on a very physical display, with broken hands, punching walls and things like that. …in my relationship with [my sister] there's always a feeling of animosity toward her [I asked if there was a third way in that he could …I try and get one step ahead of people so I'm not never actually confronted with …Oh yes, definite… because you rebel situations where I might need to be challenged…I get quiet anxious about going in there thinking oh god that needs doing I (laugh). Yeah, hand on heart it did make me get quite anxious quite a lot of the time just think...I don’t know internalising the situation, don’t know if I deal with it at work, I deal with it when I come home get me cider out and aggressor. I would make sure it was very everything goes fuzzy so kind of feels alright clear that I was not going to be their victim. for a while. aggressive … if I thought there was an inkling of intimidation that was going to come my way then I would then I would be the against it. I know it certainly did with me. I put it as assertiveness now but I think have become aggressive] M3 ...bullying [made me] stronger. As a person. More determined… I think you can go one of two ways; you can lose all confidence because of it and become submissive or you do become assertive.” Table 2: Comparison of outcomes of childhood bullying This can be seen in Table 2: Comparison of outcomes of childhood bullying above which demonstrates that M2 and M3 both appear to have an enormous amount of energy stored up. M3 is © Damian Stoupe 2011 39 focussed outwards into business success (energy as drive) whereas M2 appears to be focussed inwards with explosive outburst and lingering resentment towards family members (energy as hatred). 4.4 Bullying in small businesses In a survey in 2008 it was suggested that there were fewer reports of bullying in small businesses compared to large organisations (TUC, 2008). In response John Wright, then FSB Chairman, said “small business owners know their greatest asset is their staff and they are far more likely to treat them as individuals and recognise their needs” (Federation of Small Businesses, 2008), thereby suggesting that bullying was not an issue in small businesses. All the interviewees were aware of issues of bullying in local small businesses. When discussing this M3 said: Who are you going to ask? If you ask the owner of the small business that employs two people is there any bullying in your business? What‟s he going to say? If it then becomes ten people that are in there you‟re still going to ask the boss invariably and he‟ll say “No”. If you go up to 40, 60, 100 and you‟ve got a HR manager there, the HR manager is not going to want to say “Yes”. If you go up to 2,000, 5,000 employees the HR manager will probably want to say “Yes there is bullying because that‟s why I‟m being employed (laugh) so, if I say there‟s nothing then maybe my job will go.” I‟m quite sure in my business, well I know there is. There is a pecking order; there is friction between a couple of people. He also suggested that the owner of a business must make a calculated decision: If the people that are bullying … are useful members of staff and if your business is going in the right direction, what do you do to upset the status quo? You also then have employment law where you have to prove that someone needs to be taken out of the chain….So do you turn a blind eye to it, the sub-culture, that you know is there because it isn‟t affecting you. F2 provided a concrete example, supporting M3, of her leaving a business because of bullying: © Damian Stoupe 2011 40 I fought it as much as I could … but he had no consideration for others and would ride roughshod over what you said and so in the end left and there was no come back in the company because why would the owner stop it because this guy was really successful… and [the owner] said if I worked more like that I‟d be more successful too. F3 stated that there may be a tendency for small businesses to be more work focussed than people orientated as the pressure is on to make the business pay. As a result people „leave the touchy feely aspects behind and just get on with the job. Small business cannot have people who just work at one pace, they need to be moved along but they may claim that you are bullying them.‟ The danger here is that employees will copy the owner‟s behaviour, whether positive or negative. F1 and M1 were afraid of the consequences of standing up for themselves or others: I promise she will single people out. She would try and get everyone sacked. So I mean, there is a fear of losing my job for nothing, well not nothing but I mean what‟s the point in sort of doing that [saying something to the owner]when she's going to turn round and probably get me sacked as well. So in a way I'm sort of stuck because I mean there's not a lot I can do really... (M1) F1 was quite forthright in her response: „Sometimes I want to ask her “do you actually know what you are doing here?” But… [what stops you?] My position! I want to keep my job (laugh)‟ (F1) Summary of findings From these findings it is clear that there are historical issues for individuals who are accused of bullying. It seems people react on three different levels; their personal history of bullying, their own self-image and what they feel they are expected to think. The image of the demon bully was never far away from their awareness. © Damian Stoupe 2011 41 An accusation of bullying in childhood, accompanied by actual bullying appears to leave a lasting impact on some people which motivates them in the present day and leads them to avoid bullying others but that very avoidance can be deemed to be a form of bullying. What is also clear is that, contrary to other research, bullying in small businesses is deemed to be an issue that needs to be addressed, however, this may be in part be due to the rural location and the reduced employment opportunities. The Hollway & Jefferson defended subject methodology provided a framework in which to develop trust with the participants and therefore, provided more detailed and personal responses than I believe would have been obtained from a quantitative methodology. In the next chapter the study will discuss possible explanations for these reactions. © Damian Stoupe 2011 42 Chapter 5 - Discussion In respect of this study question the findings have provided the data to explain what the reactions are and to a limited extent, provided an understanding of the experiences behind why people may react in the way they indicated. This section seeks to explore the response in more detail, informed within a mimetic framework. This discussion will focus on the impact of the accusation in respect of developing a concept of a phased response to the accusation which will then be explored through the development of a mimetic drama cycle. Due to the size of the sample the ideas offered below are tentative but may be useful pointers for future research. 5.1 A phased response to accusations I would suggest that when faced with an accusation of bullying, people move through four phases of response, namely; emotional, expressive, reflective and action (figure 3). Below I have included the actual responses of the participants and also those of the workshop attendees (Appendix 1) to provide the fullest possible picture of each phase, the figures in brackets reflect the number of times the response was provided by different people. I would suggest that if people had been asked how they would react to being bullied it would not be a dissimilar phased response. Mimetic theory would tend to recognise this phased response. Oughourlian (1995) provides an outline of a response cycle of how people respond to early life trauma; this could be adapted to account for the reactions of the accused. Initially there is a sense of trauma, either actual or perceived; this is followed by an emotional sensation of weakness, shame and/or embarrassment because they have been bullied and this has resurrected feelings often hidden since childhood, this is identified in the emotional phase of the response. Where these feelings of a lost battle linger then the intensification of these feelings appears to grow also. One could argue that the competitive or substitutive actions are encountered in both the © Damian Stoupe 2011 43 expressive and reflective stages. The action phase equates to the letting go, or as Oughourlian describes, the „forgiveness‟ stage. Emotional Phase Surprise (4), disappointed (3), appalled (2), hurt (3), gutted (2), sad (2), upset (6), devastated (4), horrified (2), mortified (2), amazed ashamed (2), angry (3), offended (1), embarrassed (1) , aware of own internal bully (2) , fuck off (1) Expressive Phase Defensive (7), unsurprised (1), disbelief (1), their problem (2), define bullying (1), protest innocence (1), undermined (1), dismissive (1), fight fire with fire (1), silence (1), why do you say that? (1), in what context? (1), who said it? (1) Reflective Phase Question (2), review behaviour (6), unwarranted criticism (1), seek advice (1), ask why (1), justify (1), their perception at that time (2), depend on relationship (1), more questions than answers (1), label causes problems (1), acceptance issue- right/wrong (1), claim of bullying could be bullying (1), it’s a strength (1), communicated/projected (1), at time yes (1) Adaptive need to change (1), behaviour to other person would change (+/-) (1), it's true I am (1), adapt if necessary (1) Figure 3: Four Phased Response to Accusations Whilst the adapted Oughourlian response cycle (figure 4) shows this movement to be linear, I would argue that the phased response is more dynamic. Its ultimate objective is to move from initial emotional, almost instinctual reactions, through to adaptation or stage where acceptance and change occurs. There does appear to be a great deal of movement between the stages, up and down, before the Adaptive Stage can be attained. This may be because at all the other stages there is conflict to differing degrees and there is a risk of moving into different mimetic drama cycles during the overall movement towards the Action stage. It is entirely possible that some people may never attain the Action stage (M2 and M3 for example). © Damian Stoupe 2011 44 Emotions Trauma •Actual or perceived •Anger, shame, weakness, humiliation, self-blame Competition or substituion Letting Go Figure 4: Responses to early life trauma (adapted from Oughourlian 1995) Knowing where people are on this phased response could provide assistance in dealing with people when discussing bullying behaviours at work. The next section will develop this theme further by looking at how a well-used counselling tool can be adapted to provide signposts for moving out of the drama cycle. The findings of this research do suggest that the drama triangle (Karpman, 1968) has some validity. In this triangle there is a relationship between a victim, a persecutor and, what is known as a rescuer (someone who feels a need to help others, often to their own detriment). These titles are what Karpman described as scripts, which is a transactional analysis term to describe a way of reacting to different life events which were developed during childhood and, reinforced by parents and other events in life, for example a phobia (Stewart & Joines, 2008). © Damian Stoupe 2011 45 Persecutor Victim Rescuer Figure 5: Karpman's Drama Triangle 5.2 Mimetic Rivalry – a practical example What can be identified from this study is that at a superficial level there is a duel occurring wherein two individuals are claiming to be the greatest victim. This was presented clearly by the discussion with M1. M1‟s was adamant in his belief that his manger was bullying him, he stated that „if someone is picking on you then it‟s bullying.‟ When his manager „picks‟ on him: it really pisses me off. It makes me quite angry as well actually because you know I don't like feeling like that …I just generally have to walk away and you know spend five minutes alone so I don‟t say anything I would regret or maybe do something I'd regret, not like punching her or anything, but smashing things up. If M1 tries to say anything to her „she always turns it back on to me, and you know it‟s always “yeah you did this...” © Damian Stoupe 2011 46 On the face of it this would be seen as a case of bullying. When I asked M1 what would he think if she didn‟t know she was bullying him he seemed quite taken aback and said „I guess it would be a lot worse and she just wouldn't, well I mean ... it would just constantly be a battle at work.‟ I would suggest that, from a mimetic perspective, this is exactly what is happening. Both parties are locked in a conflict with each other not realising what is occurring and confident in their role as victim. M1 has no respect for the manager, he sees himself as better at the job and that he would be a better manager. It appears that M1 is actually jealous of his managers‟ position. It is not possible to know the motivations of the manager in this situation. M1 demonstrates “a lack of …that person. I could be quite blunt with them as well ...It generally makes [the relationship] worse. (ha-ha) um ... someone in authority, if you start acting in that sort of way then, they're going to give it back it's just going to carry on I suppose‟ if he has no respect for the person. Neither is aware that they are locked in a war; having any number of skirmishes and battles; Girard would define this state as mimetic conflict or rivalry. Neither can see an escape from the oscillation between dominated and dominating. In terms of the Drama Triangle (Karpman, 1968) they fluctuate between the positions of persecutor and victim. This rivalry is about domination and power; it clothes itself with „rancour, claiming rights, anger, depression, resentment‟ (Oughourlian, 2010). It has been argued that these positions are inauthentic and are a response to previous personal histories (Stewart & Joines, 2008); I would also suggest that the two antagonists are modelling their behaviours on each other. M1 is imitating his manager‟s behaviours; when she picks on him he retaliates by ignoring her leaving her feeling as if he is picking on her. M1 illuminated this aspect by saying that when he feels picked on he leaves the room for 5 or 10 minutes and when he comes back it „will be awkward say for five or ten minutes and then after that she always, always, always starts kissing my arse. She always knows that she's annoyed me so she'll always try and patch it up. I won‟t say anything to her I'll just stay quiet and act as if nothing has happened.‟ © Damian Stoupe 2011 47 M1 feels picked on manger retaliates M1 becomes defensive manager feels weak/humiliated manager pushes for response M1 acts as if nothing hapened M1 leaves room manager offers full apology M1 returns ignores manager M1 continues to ignore manager attempts apology Figure 6: An example of mimetic rivalry When saying this M1 seemed quite pleased. He was winning the battle, she had been forced to apologise; but the war continues with each party gaining a temporary victory over the other. Each perceiving the other as an aggressor, each defending themselves from attack and modelling their behaviour on the other (Girard, 2010). M1 is clearly positioning himself as Victim in relation to his manager (Persecutor) and Rescuer to the rest of the team. His response to this is to react with aggression (throwing things in the stock room or storming out) or with passive aggression (staying quite, ignoring manger). His manager, would probably position herself as Victim, with M1 as Persecutor; his relationship with the team and exclusion of her creating a sense of jealousy. © Damian Stoupe 2011 48 Both appear to be claiming the position of Victim and are launching attacks on the other from that place. It is interesting that the perceived aggressor backs down. This is a move from the position of victim; it is a weakness which M1 has exploited. He knows that the manager will back down and waits for that event and ensures he receives an apology – which he ignores, he is focussed on her bullying. Her apology is effectively rejected as her punishment continues, leading to a sense of humiliation. This cycle has continued for over two years with varying degrees of intensity. I would suggest that both parties would perceive the other as a bully; to accuse one or the other would be completely contrary to their self-perception and would initially be rejected as they both believe they are different from the other. If one reached out to the other to try and assist it is assumed that the offer would be rejected as it would reinforce the feeling of being a victim by needing to be rescued. This mimetic drama cycle could be an area for future research. It would require access to both the accused and the recipient which may be difficult. M1 moves out of the cycle At the end of the interview I asked M1 ‘What would you think if it was a game? I'm not saying it’s a conscious or deliberate game, I'm just wondering how you would feel if it was a competition? I would probably hate her even more. Maybe I would try and find ways to break the game, like try and just take a different approach to how I'd maybe react when she's doing these or maybe even just try and in a way outsmart her and not give her what she wants. Outside of the interview we did discuss ways in which M1 could step out of what was in essence a blame game. Having explained to him the basics of mimetic rivalry and his possible role in perpetuating the game, we came up with some strategies to help him exit the game. In the second interview M1 said that the relationship had changed. He had decided to do what she asked him to do © Damian Stoupe 2011 49 straightaway and not complain, this took him out of the conflict; he no longer used his manager as a model therefore she was no longer a rival. 5.4 Revisiting the drama triangle To help M1 escape the game it was necessary to help him understand why the drama triangle seems to be incomplete. It appears to focuses too much on individual rather than interdividual dynamic relationships constituted by the Other; as such, it ignores the inescapable modelling that occurs within relationships. Extending the drama triangle to take account of an external mediator, someone out who can act as model but who is highly unlikely to become a rival, would provide an exit point from the triangle. Figure 8 proposes how such a model may appear. In the model the traditional drama triangle is augmented by the use of the mediator position. Karpman (1968) refers to the positions of victim, persecutor and rescuer as inauthentic; the mediator position would be authentic. It is a position where there is security, self-esteem, confidence, assertiveness. It is a position of strength grounded upon the model of an external mediator, not the other positions in the triangle. Girard would argue that this position can only be occupied by Christ, I am unsure of the validity of this, as long as the external mediator is unable to become a rival they may be used; in this sense it is important for business leaders to demonstrate the behaviours that they espouse in their corporate policies. There is an inherent risk that in certain situations the mediator may be drawn back into the either triangle by a reaction to previous experiences (as identified in the mimetic drama cycle, figure 7) or by other people, particularly those people who are closest to them in their mimetic desires. To avoid this, the mediator needs to be constantly referring back to the external mediator for guidance (external mediation process) this ensures the mediator remains in a secure position. By constantly referencing behaviours against the external mediator it provides a conscious buffer against the triangle. To remain in the internal mediation process will lead an individual to constantly feel they are in the victim role; possibly internalising the persecutor and seeking for the rescuer, but feeling shame that they need to be rescued. I would argue that this individual will eventually seek out a scapegoat, © Damian Stoupe 2011 50 someone to blame their misfortunes on, thereby becoming a victim-bully (moving into the sacrificial process). Where two or more individuals are in rivalry, Girard would suggest that eventually, if they could not kill each other, they would identify unconsciously, an innocent third party to be blamed and then sacrificed. The choice of the scapegoat may appear to be totally random; however I would suggest it would be based upon someone who is different in some way to the rivals through looks, colour, disability, sexuality or maybe intelligence, confidence, religion or simply that they are left-handed. The reason does not actually matter to the rivals so long as they can expel the individual and find a sense of calm between them – until next time. This model is in its infancy and requires more research to assess its validity; nevertheless, it does recognise movements between positions both in respect of internal and external dialogues. In helping us to recognise where others place themselves we can begin to see the strength of the model in that it allows us to react to an individual from an assertive, secure position rather than from within the triangle, allowing for discussions to be conducted rather than accusations being thrown. 5.5 Concern for the Other This study has highlighted that there is a concern about others; however in most circumstances it is concern from within the triangle. With the exception of two participants there was a desire to place themselves in the role of Rescuer in the triangle, so long as there was no risk to them of taking up that position, which automatically places them back in the position of victim. There was a sense of fear of harassment and of being the harasser; to the extent that even when challenging the accuser, people were unwilling to share their true emotional response in the interview - only after a challenge were they willing to express their sense of anger and humiliation. This led to some interesting discussions about how the relationship with an accuser may change (M5, F3, F2, and M2). © Damian Stoupe 2011 51 The participants were afraid of the consequences of being „labelled‟ if they challenged people‟s behaviour in the workplace, the line between bullying and strong management appears to be blurred for many people. F3 expressed concern that a difficult employee was „getting away with things‟ because everyone was frightened of tackling her because of her personal circumstances. This was damaging the organisation but no-one was willing to handle the situation. The victim may have been unaware of the problems but more victims were being created with increasing levels of resentment. Zizek (2009) points out that there is a contradiction between the political correctness of the modern era which insists on openness and tolerance and yet this same tolerance is discarded by an „obsessive fear of harassment‟ ( (p. 35) which ultimately results in an attempt to reject of Other. In his discussion he describes the apparent contradiction between the homo sacer, or what Girard refers to as the pharmakos, one who is set apart with all their rights and privileges withdrawn awaiting sacrifice for the purpose of bringing peace to the community (Girard, 1989), and the vulnerable who are constantly threatened with harassment. I would argue that both the „bully‟ and the „victim‟ can be ascribed the role of pharmakos and could be elevated to the role of scapegoat and blamed for all the wrongs of the department then expelled. Once the individual is removed a sense of calm is restored to the group until the next crisis occurs. As the systemic elements of the crisis have not been resolved, in favour of the quicker and easier sacrifice then crisis will begin to rise again - may be the bully or victim-bully will attack someone else. In a Nietzschean dominated culture this collective hallucination may be seen as acceptable and necessary if the emphasis is on the survival of the fittest and human sacrifice, in whatever form that may take (Nietzsche, 1973). Girard would argue that it only takes one person to stand up and say „No‟ for the illusion to be shattered and others to start questioning the behaviours (Girard, 2005). It is clear that in some offices people do stand up and say certain behaviours are wrong; the question needs to be researched as to why other groups do not. In the above findings it is clear that people are afraid of being the next to be bullied - they are more willing to join the mob and sacrifice the Other. © Damian Stoupe 2011 52 The Mimetic Drama Cycle Figure 7: The Mimetic Drama Cycle © Damian Stoupe 2011 53 Chapter 6 – Conclusion This conclusion is divided into three sections; implications for practice, areas for further study and a concluding statement. Due to the size of the sample group the study cannot claim to have proved anything, what it has done has done is provided signposts for future research projects into an important area which has, so far, received little attention. 6.1 Implications There are implications of this research for those whose task it is to deal with bullying on a day to day basis:  Counsellors should be aware of the phased response to accusations and the impact of the mimetic drama cycle for work in many different area of counselling. Whilst the focus in this study has been on workplace bullying, the mimetic drama cycle could be applied to many different areas where scapegoats are identified and abused, such as sexual offending and domestic violence.  HR managers need to be aware of the impact of their bullying and harassment documents and language that they include. Language which prejudges individuals because of the association with past experiences can be very damaging to people. A move towards a less judgmental approach, which does not lessen the seriousness of the allegations, may be more effective than using the label „perpetrator‟ or „aggressor‟.  Organisations need to be aware of the subcultures that support the mimetic drama cycle through senior management behaviour. Positive workplace behaviours need to be encouraged but more importantly need to be demonstrated. Those subcultures that support the mimetic drama cycle need to be tackled. This will not be easy or quick.  We all need to reflect on how we contribute to bullying. 54 6.2 Further study areas There are a number of areas which have been identified through the study that require further research:  Discussions with the participants, the findings and anecdotal evidence suggests that much of what is described as bullying may not be deliberate, however, it is accepted that this assumption needs to be validated in further research.  How important is an individual‟s level of self-esteem as a factor in bullying for both the accused and the recipient?   To what extent has bullying been feminised over the last 30 years and what does this mean? Why are people reluctant to intervene in bullying situations and what can be done to provide them with a feeling of safety?  This study suggests that victim-bullying is a factor that needs to be taken onto account when dealing with bullying at work and in other areas; it could be an area for careful exploration.  I would also suggest that both the mimetic drama cycle and the phased response should be subjected to further rigorous research and its applicability both within bullying and for other potential applications. 6.3 Concluding statement This study has asked people to look into their own shadow side, how they might be viewed by others and how they would react to that perception and has tentatively offered a way for moving out of the cycle of violence using mimesis. For those involved both in the interviews and in the workshops it was a scary experience to realise that they may well be viewed in this way. The participants have all stated that they left the interview and have reflected on how others may perceive their behaviour and, maybe even more accurately, they have gone away thinking about how they see themselves in relation to others. Certainly for M1 and M3, using a mimetic approach to the workplace and their daily lives it has led to positive change. 55 The study suggests that the move towards subjectivity in workplace bullying, whilst inevitable and in parts necessary, because of the impact of psychological harassment, has led to the rise of the victimbully. Many workplace policies focus on subjective acts, the very subjectivity of which leads to a sense of indifference to suffering. By forcefully asserting their rights, people appear to be indifferent to those around them (Zizek, 2009). A movement towards the awareness of the interdividuality of humans, through a communitarian approach, may lead to a reduction in adversarial relationships. The danger of not confronting this issue is a growing fear of harassment, not just among the workforce but also across society due to mimetic contagion, as people feel impotent and seek vengeance rather than reconciliation. This small scale study has suggested that when confronted with an accusation of bullying individuals will move through a four-phased response ranging from instant emotional reactions through to a cycle to being able to move on from the event. Organisations need to be aware of the impact of an accusation when approaching individuals. The study suggests that an approach of „bullying the bully‟ continues the cycle of violence; it may reduce issues at work but that violence may be transferred to the home and from home to school, via the children, or to other workplaces through partners and friends. Schools are now attempting to use restorative approaches to bullying to try and break the cycle of power and control (Hopkins, 2006), possibly recognising the role of the mimetic drama cycle. I would argue that the schools initiatives will fail if adult organisations remain focussed on defining blame and seeking vengeance, as the children will learn from the behaviours of the parents and adult role models around them. The adults need to move out of the drama triangle, modelling their behaviours on those around them and be helped into the mediator position. This study suggests that this can only be achieved through observation, the use of an external mediator, and by rewarding positive workplace behaviours. 56 References Alison, J. (2004). On being liked. London: Darton, Longman & Toddd. Alison, J. (2007, October 30). Love Your Enemy:Within a Divided Self. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from James Alison: http://www.jamesalison.co.uk/pdf/eng50.pdf Aristotle. (350 BC). Poetics. Chapter 4 The origin and development of poetry. Retrieved July 14, 2010, from identitytheory.com: http://www.identitytheory.com/etexts/poetics4.html Bailie, G. (1995). Violence Unveiled. New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company. Baillien, E., Neyens, I., & De Witte, H. (2005). Task, team and organizational risk factors for mobbing at work - a qualitative study. Retrieved October 19, 2008, from http://elfi.baillien.googlepages.com/: http://elfi.baillien.googlepages.com/presentations Baillien, E., Neyens, I., de Witte, H., & De Cuyper, N. (2009). A Qualitative Study on the Development of Workplace Bullying: Towards a Three Way Model. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1-16. Bailllien, E., Neyens, I., & De Witte, H. (2007). Conflict Management as a mediator between conflict and workplace bullying:implementatoion of the Dual Concern Theory. Retrieved October 20, 2008, from http://elfi.baillien.googlepages.com: elfi.baillien.googlepages.com/ElfiBaillien_KUL_DualConcern.pdf Bandura, A. (2003). Observational learning. In J. H. Byrne (Ed.), Encyclopedia of learning and memory. (2nd ed., pp. 482-484). New York: Macmillan. Belllinger, C. (2006). Putting Girard in his place (within Trinitarian Theology). Retrieved January 20, 2009, from University fo St Paul: http://www.ustpaul.ca/covr2006/Document/CharlesBellinger.pdf Berry, A. (2008, June). Notes from the Desire Factory. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from The Raven Foundation: http://www.ravenfoundation.org/resources/papers Cheyne, J. A. (1998). Mimesis and Semiotics of Bullying: A group and self defining Ritual. Retrieved 2008, from University of Waterloo: http://watarts.uwaterloo.ca/~acheyne/Misc/MimeticBullying.html Clifton, J., & Serdar, H. (2000). Bully Off! Lyme Regis: Russel House Publishing Ltd. Depoortere, F. (2008). Christ in Postmodern Philosophy. London: T&T Clark. Ericksen, A. (2009). The Universal Truths of Islam and Mimetic Anthropology. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from The Raven Foundation: http://www.ravenfoundation.org/resources/papers Federation of Small Businesses. (2008, September 2). FSB Press Releases. Retrieved Oct 20, 2009, from Federation of Small Businesses: http://www.fsb.org.uk/discuss/forum_posts.asp?TID=1347&PID=9991 Fetherstone, A. B. (2000, April). From Conflict Resolution to Transformative Peacebuilding:Reflections from Croatia. Retrieved October 27, 2008, from University of 57 Bradford, Centre for Conflict Resolution: http://www.bradford.ac.uk/acad/confres/papers/pdfs/CCR4.pdf Field, T. (1996). Bully in Sight. Wantage: Success Unlimited. Field, T. (1999). Workplace bullying definitions. Retrieved January 28, 2010, from Bullyonline: http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/defns.htm Fleming, C. (2008). Rene Girard Violence and Mimesis. Cambridge: Polity. Fox, C., & Boulton , M. (2003). Evaluating the effectiveness of social skills training programmes for victims of bullying. Education Research, 45, 231-247. Gallese, V. (2009). Two sides to mimesis. Journal of Consciousness studies, 21-44. Gandhi, M. K. (2007). An Autobiography. (M. Desai, Trans.) London: Penguin. Garrells, S. R. (2006). Imitation, Mirro Neirons and Mimetic Desire. Contagion, 12-13, 47-86. Giga, S. I., Hoel, H., & Lewis, D. O. (2008). The Costs of Workplace Bullying. Research Commissioned by the Dignity at Work Partnership. Girard, R. (1989). The Scapegoat. (Y. Freccero, Trans.) Baltimore: The John Hopkins Univeristy Press. Girard, R. (2003). Things hidden since the foundation of the world. (S. Bann, & M. Metteer, Trans.) London: Continuum International Publishing. Girard, R. (2005). Violence and sacred. (P. Gregory, Trans.) London: Continuuum. Girard, R. (2010). Battling to the End. (M. Baker, Trans.) East Lansing: Michigan State University Press. Graves, D. (2002). Fighting Back. London: McGraw Hill. Grote, J., & McGreeney, J. (1997). Clever as Serpents. Collegevillle, Minesota: Liturgical Press. Gunsalus, C. K. (2006). The College Administrator's Survival Guide. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Health and Safety Executive. (2009). What should we be doing as an organisation to tackle bullying and harassment? Retrieved July 30, 2010, from Heath and Safety Executive: http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/furtheradvice/bullying.htm Hoel, H., & Cooper, C. L. (2000). Destructive Conflict at Work. Manchester: UMIST. Hoel, H., & Giga, S. (2006). Destructive Interpersonal Conflict in the Workplace: The Effectiveness of Management Interventions.:. London.: British Occupational Health Research Foundation. Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2009). Doing Qualitative Research Diffrently. London: Sage. Hopkins, B. (2006). Restorative approaches to bullying behaviour – breaking the cycle of power and control. Retrieved June 2009, from Transformingconflict.org: http://transformingconflict.org/library.php?id=1280239234 58 Ironside, M., & Seifert, R. (2003). Tackling bullying in the workplace. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper, Bullying and Emotional abuse in the workplace. London: Taylor & Francis. Jacoby, T. (2008). Understanding Conflict and Violence. London: Routledge. Karpman, S. (1968). Fairy Tales and Script Drama Analysis. Retrieved July 14, 2010, from The International Transactional Analysis Association: Fairy tales help inculcate the norms of society into young minds consciously, but subconsciously may provide an attractive stereotyped number of roles, locations, and timetables for an errant life script. Kohler Riessman, C. (2008). Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. London: Sage. Leea, R. T., & Brotheridge, C. M. (2006). When prey turns predatory: Workplace bullying as a predictor of counteraggression/bullying, coping, and well-being. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(3), 352 - 377. Levinas, E. (1996). Basic Philosophical Writings. (A. T. Peperzak, S. Critchley, & R. Bernasconi, Eds.) Bloomington: Indian University Press. Manderson, D. (2006). Emmanuel Levinas and the philosophy of negligence. Retrieved November 20, 2009, from www.mcgill.ca: www.mcgill.ca/files/crclaw-discourse/TortLawReviewArticle.pdf Marr. (2007). Marr, A. (2007). Tools for Peace. Lincoln USA: iUniverse. Matthews, M. (2006). Awake to God. London: SPCK. Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative Research Design; An Interactive Approach. London: Sage. Melzoff, A. (2007). The „like me‟ framework for recognizing and becoming an intentional agent. Acta Psychologica, 124, 26-43. Namie, G. (2003). Workplace bullying: Escalated incivility. Ivey Business Journal(November/December 2003). Nietzsche, F. (1973). The Will to Power: In Science, Nature, Society and Art. New York: Random House USA Inc. O'Byrne, P. (2007). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Mixing Methods: An Analysis of Combining Traditional and Autoethnographic Approaches. Qualittative Health Research, 17. Oliver, M. (2002). Emancipatory Research: A vehicle for social transformation or policy development. 1st Annual Disability Research Seminar. Dublin. O'Moore, M. (2010). Defining Violence: Towards A Pupil Based Definition. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from Novas Res: http://www.comune.torino.it/novasres/newviolencedefinition.htm Oughourlian, J.-M. (1995). Desire is mimetic: A Clinical Approach. Contagion, 03, 44-49. Oughourlian, J.-M. (2010). The Genesis of Desire. (E. Webb, Trans.) East Lansing: Michigan State University Press. 59 Queensland Govt. (2007). Emotional Violence. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from Queensland Government Department fo Education and Training : http://education.qld.gov.au/actsmartbesafe/violence/emotional.html Quine, L. (1999). Workplace bullying in NHS community trust: staff questionnaire survey. BMJ, 318, 228-32. Rayner, C., & Hoel, H. (1997). A Summary Review of Literature Relating to Workplace Bullying. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 7, 181-191. Rayner, C., & McIvor, K. (2006). Reoprt to the Dignity at Work Project Steering Committee Research Findings. Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth Business School. Roberts, C. S., & Ziegler, J. A. (2007, Nov). Levinas on the fireline: Recovering an “ethic of the other” in stakeholder reactions to fatal accidents and close calls in wildland firefightin. Retrieved Dec 20, 2008, from http://blogs.valpo.edu: http://blogs.valpo.edu/jziegler/files/2007/11/levinas-abstract-for-hd-conf.pdf sangrea.net. (2008, April 30). Bullying Pictures. Retrieved August 24, 2010, from Bullying!!: http://www.sangrea.net/bully/pictures.php Schwager, R. (2000). Must there be scapegoats? (M. L. Assad, Trans.) New York: Gracewing. Somerset County Council. (2001). Firm Sizes by employees. Retrieved August 10, 2009, from Somerset County Council: http://www.somerset.gov.uk/somerset/statistics/contents/employment/firmsizesbyemployees/f irm%20sizes%20by%20employees%202001.pdf Stewart, I., & Joines, V. (2008). TA Today. Nottingham: Lifespace Publishing. Stoupe, D. (2008). Bullying. Counselling at Work(Winter 2007/2008), 2-4. Tapper, K., & Boulton, M. J. (2005). Victim and peer group responses to different forms of aggression among primary school children. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 238-253. Thorne, B. (2004). Infinitely Beloved. London: Darton, Longman & Todd. Toronto Group. (2005). Research as empowerment? Report of a series of seminars organised by the Toronto Group . York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation . Townsley, J. (2003, December). RENE GIRARD‟S THEORY OF VIOLENCE, RELIGION AND THE SCAPEGOAT. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from jeramyt.org: http://www.jeramyt.org/papers/girard.html TUC. (2008). What do workers want? An agenda for the workplace from the workplace. London: TUC. Westhues, K. (2008, June). CRITIQUES OF THE ANTI-BULLYING MOVEMENT AND RESPONSES TO THEM. Retrieved Oct 8, 2008, from Workplace Bullying Institute: http://www.workplacebullying.org/research/conferences/images/kwmontreal.pdf Zizek, S. (2009). Violence. London: Profile Books Ltd. 60 61 Appendix 1 Findings from Bullying Workshops The table below identifies the key words or phrases people offered when asked questions in workshops on bullying behaviours. I have left it as raw data for others to use as they may desire. Where more than one person provided a response the total number is shown on brackets Key Question If you were to sum up the word „bully‟ in one word, image or sound (or a very, very short phrase) what would it be? Responses from attendees Aggressive (5), aggression (3), aggressor, aggression, verbal abuser, taunting, shouting, fear, domineering, uncompromising, unreasonable behaviour, unhappiness, aggressor, strength, , physical or mental threat, , disempowerment, , intimidation, shouting, thug, extreme unhappiness, pressure, belittling, intimidation, humiliation, , schoolboy, fear, domineer, , forcing to do things without reason, difficult, Intimidation, victimisation, exploitation, humiliation, hounding, manipulative, lack of acknowledgement,, dismissive, controlling, fear, lack of insight, behavioural, psychopath, physical threat, belittling, sociopath, “tin pot god”, persistent behaviour, unreasonable (workload), unwarranted criticism or threat, institutional, having information withheld (as affects ability to do job), offensive remarks, personal remarks, rudeness, threats, persistently doing, manipulating, aggressive, taunting, sarcastic, belittling, disrespectful, undermining, mental rather than physical, power seeking, superiority, scheming, sometimes subtle behaviours, force your will on others, using negative reinforcement, belittling, intimidation, frustrated, misguided, unjustified, inappropriate behaviour, personally disordered, lack of choice, subjective, also depends on the perception of the individual who thinks he/she is bullied, defence of the bully: hypersensitivity to being given instruction, or being asked to do tasks, forcing will on others, verbal abuse, negative (?) belittling (?) lack of emotional intelligence, emotional, uncompromising, unjustified position/rationale, threatening, inappropriate swearing, domineering, hierarchies: dominant/subservient, subjective, context, belittling, opinions don‟t count, disempowerment, aggression, undermining, unsupportive, unfair blaming, ignoring, abuse of power, exclusion, shouting, intimidation, Selective about who to What behaviours would you describe as “bullying” 62 talk to, Aggression/inappropriate language, Forcing people to do what they want, Not listening, Not respecting, Not changing behaviours when told, inconsiderate, treating people differently, undermining, condescending, ridiculing, body language, picking on mistakes, political manoeuvring, creating an unpleasant environment, intimidating, burst of anger, shouting How have you felt/would you feel about being called a „bully‟? Surprise, disappointed, appalled, disappointed, defensive, question, hurt, unsurprised, surprise, gutted, saddened, upset, devastated, shock, review behaviour, surprise, horrified, mortified, upset, appalled, amazed, disbelief, sad, unwarranted criticism, threat, defensive, upset but relieved, hurt/gutted, disappointed, question oneself, their problem, shock, need to change, define bullying, ashamed, angry, protest innocence, shamed, horrified, offended, defensive, upset, shocked, undermined, reflect on it, seek advice, why??, justify, angry, their perception at the time, devastated, defensive, depend on relationship, think about it, mortified, embarrassed, dismissive, fight fire with fire, question myself, angry, behaviour to other person would change. More questions than answers, internal personal bully, it doesn‟t go away – different form, different level of awareness, label causes problems, acceptance issue – right/wrong, role of perception, claim of bullying could be bullying, silence. Devastated, its true I am, bullying is a primitive response, using bullying v being a bully, parent as bully, shock, question how has communicated/projected At times yes, why do you say that, surprise, horrified, want evidence/info, defensive, context, who says it, upset 63