Workplace Bullying and Power Distance
Does high power-distance culture in organizations increases the fear of reporting for workplace bullying?
Introduction
The objective of this study is to understand the direct relation between one of Hofstede’s (2003) four dimensions and the risk of reporting for workplace bullying in employees among various organisational culture. Culture effects on reporting of bullying incidents to management due to authoritative distance between employees and managers, and create dissatisfaction at job even after reporting (Wornham, 2003). Many studies in the area of workplace bullying has been done by researchers focusing on who reported being bullied and others who were observed bullied but, researches where victims were afraid by post reporting effects due to authoritative distance in organisation(s), is very little known. This literature will start by first defining high power distance. Thereafter, risk or fear of reporting for Workplace bullying will be explained via defining workplace bullying and its effects at workplace. Finally, this research will highlight the impact of high power-distance culture in organisations on victim who afraid to report bullying at workplace. Limitations and further research suggestions will be provided in conclusion.
High power distance (PD)
Hofstede’s (1991) definition created a logical base to understand PD, “The extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally” (p. 28).
A further definition of PD is given by Xie et. al.(2009), in a culture, unequal distribution of power on the basis of prestige and wealth. PD is cultural acceptance of hierarchical power (Loh et al, 2010). Therefore, PD is a belief of unequal distribution of power and authorities in a society. High-PD is observed in society emphasizes the importance of authority in social hierarchies and may use special expressions towards superiors (Richardson and Smith,
Introduction
The objective of this study is to understand the direct relation between one of Hofstede’s (2003) four dimensions and the risk of reporting for workplace bullying in employees among various organisational culture. Culture effects on reporting of bullying incidents to management due to authoritative distance between employees and managers, and create dissatisfaction at job even after reporting (Wornham, 2003). Many studies in the area of workplace bullying has been done by researchers focusing on who reported being bullied and others who were observed bullied but, researches where victims were afraid by post reporting effects due to authoritative distance in organisation(s), is very little known. This literature will start by first defining high power distance. Thereafter, risk or fear of reporting for Workplace bullying will be explained via defining workplace bullying and its effects at workplace. Finally, this research will highlight the impact of high power-distance culture in organisations on victim who afraid to report bullying at workplace. Limitations and further research suggestions will be provided in conclusion.
High power distance (PD)
Hofstede’s (1991) definition created a logical base to understand PD, “The extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally” (p. 28).
A further definition of PD is given by Xie et. al.(2009), in a culture, unequal distribution of power on the basis of prestige and wealth. PD is cultural acceptance of hierarchical power (Loh et al, 2010). Therefore, PD is a belief of unequal distribution of power and authorities in a society. High-PD is observed in society emphasizes the importance of authority in social hierarchies and may use special expressions towards superiors (Richardson and Smith,
References: Bairy, K. L., Thirumalaikolundusubramanian, P., Sivagnanam, G., Saraswathi, S., Sachidananda, A., & Shalini, A. (2007). Bullying among trainee doctors in Southern India: A questionnaire study. Journal of Post Graduate Medicine, 53(2), 87-90. Bilgel, N., Aytac, S., & Bayram, N. (2006). Bullying in Turkish white-collar workers. Occupational Medicine 56(4), 226-231. Christie, P. M. J., Kwon, I. W. G., Stoeberl, P. A., & Baumhart, R. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of ethical attitudes of business managers: India, Korea and the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(3), 263–287. Einarsen, S. (2005). The nature, causes and consequences of bullying at work: The Norwegian experience. Pistes, 7(3). Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions. (2003). Retrieved from http://www.geerthofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London, England: McGraw-Hill. Johnson, S. L. (2009). International perspectives on workplace bullying among nurses: a review. International Nursing Review 56(1), 34-40. Lim, J. (2004). The role of power distance and explanation facility in online bargaining utilizing software agents. Journal of Global Information Management, 12(2), 27-43. Loh, J., Restubog, S Lutgen-Sandvik, P., Tracy, S. J., & Alberts, J. K. (2007). Burned by Bullying in the American Workplace: Prevalence, Perception, Degree and Impact. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6): 837-862. Merkin, R. S. (2006). Power distance and facework strategies. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 35(2), 139-160. Richards, J. (2003). Management of workplace violence victims, ILO/ICN/WHO/PSI,Geneva. Richardson, R Salin, D. (2003a). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: a review of enabling, motivating and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56, 1213–1232. Salin, D. (2003b). Workplace bullying among business professionals: Prevalence, antecedents, gender differences. Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10227/90 Wornham, D Xie, A., Rau, P. L. P., Tseng, Y., Su, H., & Zhao, C. (2009). Cross-cultural influence on communication effectiveness and user interface design. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33(1), 11-20.