Understanding Indirect/Covert Aggression Within the Workplace Context: The Target’s Cognitive Process Author Kent, Stacey Published 2015 Thesis Type Thesis (PhD Doctorate) School Griffith Business School DOI https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/206 Copyright Statement The author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise. Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/365827 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au Understanding indirect/covert aggression within the workplace context: The target’s cognitive process Stacey Kent BGS, MA, Grad Cert, (BC)HRMA, CAHRI Department of Employment Relations and Human Resources Griffith Business School Griffith University Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2015 Abstract Indirect/covert aggression is a set of behaviours employed by an individual (the aggressor) intended to create and inflict damage on another individual (the target) undetected (Einarsen, 1999). Indirect/covert aggression is employed within the workplace because displaying overtly aggressive behaviours toward peers, subordinates, and supervisors is generally considered socially unacceptable. Indirect/covert aggressive behaviours typically entail various circuitous behaviours, such as: vexatious rumour mongering, social isolation, and undermining professional competencies (Baron & Neuman, 1996; Neuman & Baron, 1998). Whilst previous research demonstrates that indirect/covert aggression is costly to organisations and individuals who experience it (e.g., absenteeism, employee turnover, and low performance), several issues require exploration to better understand the phenomenon, and before such workplace behaviours can be reduced. The most salient issues are identifying why individuals become the focus of indirect/covert aggression and determining the cognitive scripts (i.e., mental structures of knowledge) and behavioural scripts (i.e., behavioural performances that are applied to a specific situation, see Gioia & Poole, 1984) that they use to respond to these behaviours. The three research questions that guide my programme of research are: 1) What are individuals’ experiences of indirect/covert aggression at work? 2) To what extent do the experiences of indirect/covert aggression impact an individual’s sensemaking process? and 3) How do differences in relational scripts explain the various responses and consequences of individuals targeted by indirect/covert aggression within their workplace? With these questions at the forefront, I attempt to more fully understand the indirect/covert aggression experiences of targets and the cognitive processes that they use to make sense of and deal with these events by examining the role of targets’ indirect/covert i aggression perceptions, the emotions they experience when targeted, how they construct scripts to make sense of the aggression, and the types of scripts used. There is a dearth of information regarding the types of scripts that a target uses to respond to the indirect/covert aggression that they experience. My program of research uses Weiss and Cropanzano’s (1996) Affective Events theory (hereafter AET) as a macro- theoretical framework in conjunction with Fredrickson and Kahneman’s (1993) Peak-End (hereafter PET) theory as a micro-theoretical framework as way to explore indirect or covert aggression. Schank and Abelson’s (1977) Cognitive Script Theory will also be used to understand the types of scripts (a framework of knowledge that is used to explain how day to day events unfold) targets use when experiencing indirect/covert aggression (an affective event). To address my research questions, I carried out a mixed methods research programme consisting of three empirical studies (Studies 1a, 1b and 2) with the all-encompassing goal of uncovering the types of scripts targets of indirect/covert aggression use in relation to experiences of indirect/covert aggression. In Study 1a and 1 b (Chapter 4 and 5 respectively), using a qualitative methodology, I explored the targets’ experiences of indirect/covert aggression, their responses to those experiences, and their personal constructs (Kelly, 1955) regarding their aggressor. Through Study 1, I sought to answer the research questions, RQ1: What are individuals’ experiences of indirect/covert aggression at work? RQ2: And To what extent do the experiences of indirect/covert aggression impact an individual’s sensemaking process? Study 1a was designed to understand targets’ experiences of their petty behaved colleagues (i.e., the aggressor) at work and how they dealt with them. Study 1b was designed to identify the personal constructs (the process that individuals use to evaluate the world around them) that target’s had of the aggressor. The aim of Study 1a was to provide insights into the target’s method of processing their aggressor’s behaviour. Employing this method ii uncovered the affective events the target experienced, the most intense emotions they felt at the event’s peak, and how the event ended. The sample for Study 1 comprised 29 respondents who were interviewed for approximately 1 hour. Two specific techniques were used in Study 1a and 1b, Repertory Grid (hereafter RepGrid) technique (Kelly, 1955) and critical incident technique (Flanagan, 1954). Thematic analysis (Kassarjian, 1977) was used for both Study 1a (Chapter 4) and Study 1b (Chapter 5) and, from these studies, I developed measures for my cross sectional survey administered in Study 2. Building on my findings from Studies 1a and 1b, I developed a mediating model for Study 2 (Chapter 6) to further examine targets thought process and responses when experiencing indirect/covert aggression. More specifically, the research question guiding Study 2 was How do differences in relational scripts explain the various responses and consequences of individuals targeted by covert aggression within their workplace? Study 2 comprised a two-phase survey that was administered to students (n=143) from an Australian Undergraduate Program conducted within a Business School. More specifically, I predicted in the model that targets low in emotional intelligence, emotional regulation, and emotional stability would be more likely to report greater use of reactive and passive scripts. Furthermore, I predicted that these effects would be mediated by the target’s perceptions of the indirect/covert aggressor. Contrariwise, this model predicts that targets that are high in emotional intelligence, emotional regulation, and emotional stability will have lower perceptions of indirect/covert aggression and will engage proactive scripts. In this model, I examine the impact of emotional intelligence, emotional regulation and emotional stability in determining the scripts (reactive, proactive and passive) targets use when confronted with indirect/covert aggression. Based on the data collected, targets perceptions of indirect/covert aggression were found to partly mediate the relationship between emotional intelligence and the scripts they would formulate. Study 2 (Chapter 6) iii demonstrates my theoretical contribution in that the results revealed that targets of indirect/covert aggression, who are higher in emotional intelligence, will engage in the use of proactive scripts. The discussion chapter (Chapter 7) considers the implications, theoretical and practical contributions, limitations, and future research directions regarding my program of research. The theoretical contributions within this thesis are identifying and examining the different types targets’ scripts using a macro/micro-theoretical approach. I demonstrate how affective Events, Peak-End theory, and script theory help to better understand targets’ experiences and thought process of indirect aggression. The practical contributions of the findings for HR practitioners are also considered. It would be helpful for HR practitioners to better comprehend the target’s cognitive process when they (the target) experiences and reports indirect/covert aggression. As such, the take away message from Studies 1a, 1b, and 2 is for HR practitioners to understand that the target’s experiences of indirect/covert are beyond escalated workplace conflict and that they are targets of intentionally harmful behaviour. Future directions for research include the need to further explore specifically the successful scripts that helped individuals remove themselves from being targets of indirect/covert aggression. Another avenue is to examine what the thought processes are for HR practitioners who initially evaluate grievances of indirect/covert aggression. iv Statement of Originality This work has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself. (Signed)_____________________________ v PUBLICATION DURING CANDIDATURE Book Review Kent, S. & Muurlink, O. (2014). Getting a Grip on Why Incivility Happens Within the Workplace: A Commentary Essay, (Review and commentary of Analyzing and Theorizing the Dynamics of the Workplace Incivility Crisis, by Michael Leiter), Journal of Social Justice Review, (2014), 27, p. 137-148. Chapters in an Edited Book Kent, S., Troth, A. T., & Jordan, P. J. (2014). Institutional theory, normative pressures, emotions, and indirect aggression. In N. M. Ashkanasy, W. J. Zerbe, and C. E. J. Härtel (Eds.), Research of Emotions in Organisations, Volume 10. Bingley: Emerald Publication. Kent, S., Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. T. (2014). Mapping the terrain of aggression within the workplace context. In N. M. Ashkanasy, W. J. Zerbe, and C. E. J. Härtel (Eds.), Research of Emotions in Organizations, Volume 10. Bingley: Emerald Publication. Conferences Kent. S. A. M. and Houghton, L. (2014). Ineffective Software Eliciting Discrete Negative Emotions within Users: A look at Uplifts, Hassles, and Feral Systems. Presented at the British Academy of Management, Belfast, Ireland, September, 2014 (development paper, roundtable discussion, leading to a journal article for submission to Academy of Management Review). Houghton, L. & Kent, S. A. M. (2014). Foucault's perspective on rational and displays of emotion are formed within the context of social power, knowledge, and morality, which link them through discourse. Presented at the International Labour Process Conference, London, England, September, 2013 (paper presentation). vi Kent. S. A. M., Houghton, L. & Kerr, D. (2013). Affective Events Theory, Institutional Theory, and Feral Systems: How do they all fit? Presented at the Australian New Zealand Academy of Management, Hobart, December, 2013 (competitive stream, paper presentation). Kent, S. A. M. & Bouten Pinto, C. (2013). Ahhh…She’ll be all right, mate! Or will he be all right…? Examining men targeted by female workplace social manipulation within the Australian context from an interpretivist paradigm. Presented at the European Group of Organisational Studies, Montreal, July, 2013 (paper presentation). Bouten Pinto, C & Kent, S. A. M. (2012). The influence of emotions, culture, and context on organisational scripts. Presented at the 7th Asia-Pacific Symposium on Emotions in Worklife, Bond University (Gold Coast), November, 2012 (Poster Presentation). Kent, S. A. M., Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. T. (2012). Examining the relationship between institutional theory and the scripts of targets of social manipulation within the workplace. Presented at the European Group of Organisational Studies, Helsinki, July, 2012 (paper presentation, resulted in publication). Kent, S. A. M., Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. T. (2012). Mapping the terrain of aggression within the workplace context. Presented at EMONET VIII, Helsinki, July, 2012 (Resulted in publication). Kent, S. A. M. (2012). Examining women who are targets of social manipulation (post- confirmation). Presented at Gender Work Studies Conference, Keele University, UK, June, 2012. Kent, S. A. M. (2011). Examining women who are targets of social manipulation (pre- confirmation). Australasian Workplace Bullying Research Network Workshop, Griffith University (South Bank, Brisbane) June, 2011 (paper presentation). vii Kent, S. A. M., Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. T. (2010). The difference between a proactive and reactive target: How do they differ in behaviour? Presented at 5th Asia-Pacific Symposium on Emotions in Worklife, University of Queensland, Brisbane, November, 2010 (poster presentation). viii