Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T19:19:02.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 March 2019

Ben Farr-Wharton ,
Yvonne Brunetto Open the ORCID record for Yvonne Brunetto [Opens in a new window] ,
Mathew Xerri ,
Art Shriberg ,
Stefanie Newman  and
Joy Dienger
Ben Farr-Wharton
Affiliation:
School of Business, UTS, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Yvonne Brunetto*
Affiliation:
School of Business & Tourism, Southern Cross University, Bilinga, Queensland , Australia
Mathew Xerri
Affiliation:
Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Art Shriberg
Affiliation:
Management and Entrepreneurship, Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH, USA
Stefanie Newman
Affiliation:
TriHealth Inc., Bethesda North Hospital, OH, USA
Joy Dienger
Affiliation:
TriHealth Inc., Corporate Nursing, Cincinnati, OH, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the growing normalisation of high workloads. The study undertakes latent mean and path model comparison analysis using structural equation modelling of data from 189 nurses in the UK and 401 nurses in the USA. The findings indicate a good model fit showing a significant path from Leader Member Exchange (LMX) to work harassment, wellbeing and subsequent turnover intentions, with LMX fully mediating the path from LMX to wellbeing for UK nurses, but only partially mediating the same path for nurses in the USA. The findings suggest SET provides a better explanation for work harassment for UK nurses, whereas SA theory better explains the US nurse experience.

Keywords

structural equation modellingUSAEuropeleader-member exchangehealthcare managementhealth and wellness
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , March 2022 , pp. 348 - 362
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Hospital Association Annual Survey (2014). Fast Facts on US Hospitals. http://www.aha.org/products-services/aha-hospital-statistics.shtmlGoogle Scholar
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Branch, S., Ramsay, S., & Barker, M. (2013). Workplace bullying, mobbing and general harassment: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15, 280–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodsky, C. (1976). The harassed worker. Toronto: Lexington Books, DC Heath and Company.Google Scholar
Brunetto, Y., Farr-Wharton, B., Farr-Wharton, R., Shacklock, K., Azzopardi, J., Saccon, C., & Shriberg, A. (2017). Comparing the impact of management support on police officers’ perceptions of discretionary power and engagement: Australia, USA and Malta. The International Journal of Human Resource Management http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1375964.Google Scholar
Brunetto, Y., Farr-Wharton, R., & Shacklock, K. (2011). Using the Harvard HRM model to conceptualise the impact of changes to supervision upon HRM outcomes for different types of public sector employees. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(3), 553–573.Google Scholar
Brunetto, Y., Shacklock, K., Teo, S., & Farr-Wharton, R. (2014). The impact of management on the engagement and wellbeing of high emotional labour employees. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(17), 2345–2363.Google Scholar
Brunetto, Y., Shacklock, K., Teo, S., Farr-Wharton, R., & Nelson, S. (2015). Nurses’ supervisors, learning options and organisational commitment: Australia, Brazil and England. Journal of Nursing Management, 23(8), 1029–1038.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brunetto, Y., Xerri, M., Shriberg, A., Farr-Wharton, R., Shacklock, K., Newman, S., & Dienger, J. (2013). The impact of workplace relationships on engagement, wellbeing, commitment and turnover for nurses in Australia and the USA. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(12), 2786–2799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunetto, Y., Xerri, M., Trinchero, E., Farr-Wharton, R., Shacklock, K., & Borgonovi, E. (2015). Public-private sector comparisons of nurses’ work harassment using SET: Italy and Australia. Public Management Review, 18(10), 1479–1503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brunetto, Y., Xerri, M., Trinchero, E., Beattie, R., Shacklock, K., Farr-Wharton, R., & Borgonovi, E. (2018). Comparing the impact of management on public and private sector nurses in UK, Italy and Australia. Public Management Review, 20(4), 525–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, J., Peysakhovich, F., Wang, W., & Zhu, J. (2011). The U.K. health care system. Retrieved from http://assets.ce.columbia.edu/pdf/actu/actu-uk.pdfGoogle Scholar
Cilliers, F. (2012). A systems psychodynamic description of organisational bullying experiences. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 38(2), 1–11.Google Scholar
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dick, G. (2010). Can the organisation and supervision environment influence both bullying and organisational commitment? Evidence from a Police Force survey. Kent University Working Paper Series 196. Kent University, UK.Google Scholar
Diefenbach, T. (2009). New public management in public sector organizations: The dark sides of managerialistic ‘enlightenment’. Public Administration, 87(4), 892–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulebohn, J., Bommer, W., Liden, R., Brouer, R., & Ferris, G. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of Leader-Member Exchange. Journal of Management, 38, 1715–1759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einarsen, S. (2000). Harassment and bullying at work: A review of the Scandinavian approach. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4), 379–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einarsen, S., & Nielsen, M. (2015). Workplace bullying as an antecedent of mental health problems: A five-year prospective and representative study. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 88, 131–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farr-Wharton, R., Brunetto, Y., & Shacklock, K. (2011). Professionals’ supervisor–subordinate relationships, autonomy and commitment: A leader-member exchange theory perspective. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22, 3496–3512.Google Scholar
Farr-Wharton, B., Shacklock, K., Brunetto, Y., Teo, S., & Farr-Wharton, R. (2017). Workplace bullying, workplace relationships and job outcomes for police officers in Australia. Public Money & Management, 37(5), 325–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Fox, S., & Spector, P. (2005). Counterproductive work behaviour. Investigations of actors and targets. Washington: APA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). Using SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Graen, G., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader–member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, A., Christianson, M., & Price, R. (2007). Happiness, health, or relationships? Managerial practices and employee well-being tradeoffs. AoM Perspectives, 21, 51–63.Google Scholar
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kacmar, K., Harris, K., Carlson, D., & Zivnuska, S. (2009). Surface-level actual similarity vs. deep-level perceived similarity: Predicting leader-member exchange agreement. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 10(3), 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapierre, L. M., & Hackett, R. (2007). Trait conscientiousness, leader-member exchange, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviour: A test of an integrative model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(3), 539–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mänttäri-van der Kuip, M. 2016. Moral distress among social workers: The role of insufficient resources. International Journal of Social Welfare, 25, 86–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J., Allen, N., & Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parzefall, M., & Salin, D. (2010). Perceptions of and reactions to workplace bullying: A social exchange perspective. Human Relations, 63, 761–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellegrini, E., & Scandura, T. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 34, 566–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petitta, L., Jiang, L., & Härtel, C. (2016). Emotional contagion and burnout among nurses and doctors: Do joy and anger from different sources of stakeholders matter? Stress and Health. doi: 10.1002/smi.2724Google ScholarPubMed
Ping, R. (2004). On assuring valid measures for theoretical models using survey data. Journal of Business Research, 57, 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G (2017) Public management reforms: A comparative analysis – into the age of austerity (4th ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rayner, C. (2002). Workplace bullying. London: Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, H., Simmering, M., & Sturman, M. C. (2009). A tale of three perspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection and correction of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 762–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shacklock, K., & Brunetto, Y. (2012). The intention to continue nursing: Work factors affecting three nurse generations in Australia. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(1) 36–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shuck, B., & Reio, T. Jr. (2014). Employee engagement and well-being: A moderation model and implications for practice. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(1), 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Social Community for Nurses Worldwide 2005–2018 (2018), Nursing Journal. NurseJournal.org.Google Scholar
Travis, D. J., Lizano, E. L., & Mor Barak, M. E. (2016) ‘I'm so stressed!’: A longitudinal model of stress, burnout and engagement among social workers in child welfare settings (2016) ‘I'm so stressed!’: A longitudinal model of stress, burnout and engagement among social workers in child welfare settings. British Journal of Social Work, 46(4), 1076–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tummers, L., Brunetto, Y., & Teo, S. (2016). Workplace aggression: Introduction to the special issue and future research directions for scholars. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(1), 2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, T., & Bonett, D. (2007). Job satisfaction and psychological well-being as non-additive predictors of workplace turnover. Journal of Management, 33, 141–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xerri, M., Farr-Wharton, R., Brunetto, Y., & Lambries, D. (2016). Work harassment and local government employees: Australia and USA. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(1), 54–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar