The questionnaire for diagnosing mobbing in employees ...

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rero20

Download by: [95.168.107.53] Date: 27 December 2016, At: 07:22

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja

ISSN: 1331-677X (Print) 1848-9664 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rero20

The questionnaire for diagnosing mobbing inemployees’ relationships

Jolita Vveinhardt & Dalia Streimikiene

To cite this article: Jolita Vveinhardt & Dalia Streimikiene (2015) The questionnaire fordiagnosing mobbing in employees’ relationships, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja,28:1, 441-466, DOI: 10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

© 2015 The Author(s). Published by Taylor &Francis

Published online: 24 Aug 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 849

View related articles

View Crossmark data

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rero20

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rero20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rero20&show=instructions

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rero20&show=instructions

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2015-08-24

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2015-08-24

The questionnaire for diagnosing mobbing in employees’relationships

Jolita Vveinhardt and Dalia Streimikiene*

Institute of Sport Science and Innovations, Lithuanian Sports University, Sporto Str. 6, Kaunas,Lithuania

(Received 6 February 2015; accepted 16 July 2015)

The purpose of this article is to form the original questionnaire to identify intensityof the expression of mobbing in employees’ relationships. Mobbing in the context ofthe paper is the bullying of an individual by a group at the work place. The articlepresents only the statistical analysis of psychometric features of the formed question-naire without elaborating on the results of the empirical research on the intensity ofmobbing expression in employees’ relationships in Lithuanian organisations. Theadvantage of the questionnaire is that it is relatively short; however, it covers allfeatures which are characteristic of the mobbing phenomenon and provides theopportunity to analyse the attack that does not fall under the definition of mobbing.It can be used both for mass and local research at the level of single organisations.Economic losses are also revealed by the questionnaire through the assessment ofdamage experienced by employees, generated expenses and lost revenues.

Keywords: behaviour; employee relationships; interpersonal relationships;organisational culture; economic damage; economic losses

JEL classifications: M12, M14, M19.

1. Introduction

In the practice of organisational management it is not enough to identify mobbing inemployees’ relationships; the complex data disclosing the spectrum and depth of theproblem is necessary. The psychological and social aspects of mobbing in employees’relationships fall into the research range. However, in the practice of organisationalmanagement it is also necessary to estimate the aspects of managerial culture, whichwould disclose systemic mistakes. In order to initiate the changes in organisational man-agement, it is necessary to use a universal, inexpensive and simple instrumental base,which allows the diagnosing of problems, the relation of reasons and outcomes at thelevels of individuals and organisations systemically.

The diagnostic instrument is not only aimed to identify mobbing in employees’ rela-tionships, but also to identify the wide spectrum of harassment in the workplace. Itallows the individual and managerial problems of an organisation to be indicatedwithout performing additional surveys, thus time and financial resources are saved. It issuitable to use in both separate organisations and single branches of economic activity(industry, transport, agriculture, services, construction) as well as in public and privatesectors. The functional electronic version of the questionnaire is designed for distant

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

© 2015 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis.This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the originalwork is properly cited.

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 2015Vol. 28, No. 1, 441–466, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

mailto:[email protected]

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1075415

surveys (surveys being conducted via internet platform). Thus, the reliability of themobbing research instrument as well as analysis of the results has not only scientific,but also practical meaning in developing models of organisational management.

The research problem is formed by the following questions: What instruments areused to diagnose mobbing in employees’ relationships? What is the qualitative reliabilityof the instrument used to survey mobbing? How does the applied instrument diagnosethe intensity of the expression of mobbing in employees’ relationships? Would it bepossible to determine the economic losses suffered by the organisation, supplementingthe research instrument in the future?

Before starting to form the new questionnaire for diagnosing mobbing in employees’relationships, the review of questionnaires has been performed. Mobbing in employees’ rela-tionships is diagnosed by using different questionnaires, tests and scales. The LeymannInventory of Psychological Terrorization (LIPT) (Leymann, 1990) has been analysed.Jenkins, Zyzanski, and Rosenman (1971) use the Personality Type A/B Questionnaire(USA), Tuomi, Ilmarinen, Jahkola, Katajarinne, and Tulkki (1994) refer to the Work AbilityIndex (Sweden). Björkqvist, Lagerspetz, and Österman (1992), Björkqvist, Österman, andHjelt-Bäck (1994a), Björkqvist, Österman, and Lagerspetz (1994b) and Björkqvist (2001)have formed several scales, which can also be used in surveying mobbing in several aspects:Direct & Indirect Aggression Scales, Work Atmosphere Scale, Work Harassment Scale,Peer-estimated Shyness, Peer-estimated Conflict Behaviour and the Psychosocial WorkplaceInventory (Finland). Knorz and Zapf (1995) used the Inventory of Mobbing Acts Accordingto the Frequency of Repetitions, which has been constructed on the LIPT basis (Germany),Kaukiainen, Björkqvist, Österman, Lagerspetz, and Forsblom (1995) developed thePeer-estimated Empathy, Peer-estimated Social Intelligence instrument (Finland). Einarsenand Raknes (1997) formed the Negative Acts Questionnaire (Norway). Pranjič, Maleš-Bilič,Beganlič, and Mustajbegovič (2006) used the Mobbing Questionnaire (Croatia,Bosnia–Herzegovina) for their empirical research.

2. Theoretical substantiation

In general, the topics of mobbing are also touched on in the studies indirectly related tomobbing. Burgi (2014, p. 290) touches on the issue of mobbing when analysing theanomic impacts of labour market restructuring and the erosion of social rights inEurope. The article examines exit solutions, at the individual and collective levels,involving violence against the self (suicide) and others (mobbing, xenophobia, fascism),and concludes that Europe seems to be heading towards a protracted period of danger-laden chronic and acute anomie. Testa’s (2013, p. 126) article proposes a syntheticanalysis and contextualisation of the most significant, thought-provoking films made inItaly during the first decade of the twenty-first century which thematise or in other waysconvey the circumstances of today’s growing social inequality. Such circumstancesentail collective and individual trauma, loss of security and well-being in individualsand families, indeed an increase in family breakdown – in other words, a pervasivesocial crisis. Alongside the other films the article also analyses the case of mobbing.During the research of appraisal, coping, motivational factors and gender in vocationalrehabilitation carried out by Andersson (1996, p. 161), the semi-structured interview(with vocational rehabilitation patients), that concerned various key topics (programmeevaluation; causal attribution regarding the problem or disease; life-crises, threats, mob-bing and unjust treatment; feelings of control; current situation; the future; how theinterview was experienced) was conducted.

442 J. Vveinhardt and D. Streimikiene

The analysis of the scientific literature in respect to mobbing has highlighted someof following focuses. Aspects of communication and isolation in the context of mobbingare usually very closely interconnected. Lutgen-Sandvik’s (2003, p. 472) article synthe-sises extant research findings with the author’s own managerial experience into a com-prehensive gestalt of the European Economic Area (EEA) as a communicative processthat evolves, escalates, and moves to new targets when earlier targets exit theorganisation. Lutgen-Sandvik and Tracy (2012, p. 3) maintain that organisationalcommunication research is vital for understanding and addressing workplace bullying, aproblem that affects nearly half of working adults and has devastating results onemployee well-being and organisational productivity. A communication approachillustrates the toxic complexity of workplace bullying as it is condoned through societaldiscourses, sustained by receptive workplace cultures, and perpetuated through localinteractions. The study researching these (macro-, meso-, and micro-)communicative ele-ments addresses the most pressing questions about workplace bullying, including: howabuse is manifested, how employees respond, why it is so harmful, why resolution is sodifficult, and how it might be resolved. Cowan (2012, p. 377) states that one issue thathas started to garner more attention in organisations across the globe and among humanresource (HR) professionals is the communication phenomenon of workplace bullying.The article notes that for HR professionals, the definition of workplace bullying couldbe much more complex. As workplace bullying is abuse primarily achieved throughnegative communication, communication researchers seem well suited to explore howHR professionals make sense of this issue.

Aspects of reputation in the context of mobbing are abundantly analysed by differentauthors in different countries (D’Cruz & Rayner, 2013; Fox & Stallworth, 2010; Harveyet al., 2007; Hugh-Jones & Zultan, 2013; Katrinli, Atabay, Gunay, & Cangarli, 2010;Lutgen-Sandvik, 2008; Lutgen-Sandvik & Tracy, 2012; O’Donnell, MacIntosh, &Wuest, 2010). The damage of mobbing to health is discussed in scientific articles by thefollowing authors: Duffy and Sperry (2007), Yildirim, Yildirim, and Timucin (2007),Testa (2013), Burgi (2014), Garot (2014), and Schindeler (2014). An essential factor forunderstanding the damage of mobbing to the physical and psychological health of eachemployee and the productivity of the organisation is to realise that violence is used atwork. Studies of health and welfare in organisations show that tension at work has asignificant negative impact, weakens the mental and physical health of the employee,encourages sick leave abuse or inspires employees to seek damages and/or reduces workefficiency (Farrell & Geist-Martin, 2005). In addition, tension in the workplace is relatedto psychological burnout (Cooper, Dewe, & O‘Driscoll, 2001; Tattersall & Farmer,1995) and to social health, defined as the quality of individual network of personal andwork relationships (Farrell & Geist-Martin, 2005; Tracy, Lutgen-Sandvik, & Alberts,2006), which has a negative impact on the performance of the entire organisation: turn-over, a decrease in production, efficiency and creativity, the loss of reputation and thepossibility of legal proceedings (Bultena, 2008). The consequences of mobbing to anindividual’s health and that of their family were analysed by Duffy and Sperry (2007),who present two clinical case studies of workplace mobbing in academia.

3. Methodological considerations

The questionnaire for Diagnostics of Mobbing as Discrimination in Employees’Relations in Order to Improve Organizational Climate was constructed based on severalstudies and pilot surveys conducted (Vveinhardt, 2012; Žukauskas & Vveinhardt, 2011).

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 443

The structure of the questionnaire is presented in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2. Thedeveloped questionnaire was tested by performing several empirical studies. The suit-ability of the questionnaire was verified for the diagnostics of mobbing, and particularlyhigh reliability coefficients have been obtained, the expression of mobbing in Lithuanianorganisations and the correlation of the phenomenon with organisational climate havebeen identified. The novelty of the questionnaire is related to the fact that the culturaldiscriminatory context, which is especially relevant for the environment being surveyed,has been evaluated by means of the specific questions. The original new universalquestionnaire integrating harassment and managerial contexts was developed for thediagnostics of mobbing.

The new universal questionnaire Mobbing and Single Cases of Harassment inEmployees’ Relations (MSCH) presented in this article consists of 21 questions and 47items (Likert’s scale), which were aimed to identify what type of bullying the mobbingvictims had experienced.

The items by Leymann (1990) make the basis of the items distinguished in the ques-tionnaire (Scales 1–3). They are constructed by transforming (in the linguistic sense) theitems of Leymann presented in the LIPT inventory and formulating them in the first per-son. The items (in the original variant of the questionnaire were in Lithuanian) havebeen adapted for the specific cultural environment.

Ten of the 21 questions are about demographic character in order to form as vivid aportrait of a mobbing victim as possible. The remaining 11 questions were aimed at dis-covering harassment duration and frequency, the discriminator (a colleague, managerand so on), the reaction of the victim to harassment, the person who has provided help,the means to stop harassment, consequences for the discriminator and so on.

By means of operationalisation of concepts three scales of the instrument have beenformed: (1) Communication interferences in employees’ relations; (2) Formation of nega-tive opinion and work character; and (3) Employees’ physical state and consequences.

The first scale consists of subscales of communication and isolation. The secondscale comprises subscales of reputation and tasks. The third scale consists of subscalesof health and harm. The subscales include 47 items (communication – 11; isolation – 5;reputation – 15; tasks – 8; health – 5; harm – 3).

With the help of the items on the subscale of communication it is possible to iden-tify verbal and non-verbal actions intended to disrupt the communication with the victimof mobbing. The situation of the mobbed person, who experiences partial or completeisolation in respect of colleagues, can be identified by the item of isolation subscale.The level of debasement of the reputation of the person whose actions are revealed onthe basis of rumours, hints, etc. is found by the items comprising the subscale of reputa-tion. The situation of the mobbed person in respect of received tasks, i.e. whether thegiven tasks correspond to the competence of the employee, how humiliating the task is,etc. is evaluated by the items on the subscale of tasks. Deterioration in the health ofemployees, which is associated with both physical and financial damage, can be deter-mined by the items on the subscale of health. The items on the subscale of harm areintended to identify direct and indirect material losses. The fact that the subscales ofhealth and damage should be complemented by the items that in the future would allowthe researcher to specify economic losses, determined by the number of lost workinghours, the expenses of organisations and compensation to employees should be noted.

The culture, in which the instrument has been checked, is distinguished in thesocial-historical experience (determined by the Soviet social engineering relevant forCentral and Eastern Europe). Initiatives, perception of public decisions, publicity danger,


reticence, which despite political and social transformations taking place remain impor-tant socio-cultural factors that influence different research being performed, arecharacteristic. In pursuing precision the control questions that aim to evaluate opennessof the respondents have been included in the questionnaire.

4. Empirical results

The research sample includes 21 fields of professional activity. The fields of profes-sional activity are grouped according to the Classification of Economic Activities(Statistics Lithuania, 2008).

The empirical study was conducted in Lithuania on 11–23 April 2014. The numberof respondents was N = 1231. The survey was conducted at the respondents’ homes.The multi-stage random sampling approach was applied. The research error was 3.1%.Of 1231 respondents 867 indicated that they had experienced mobbing. The remaining364 participants experienced bullying and harassment. This article presents only theresults of the employees who had experienced mobbing.

4.1. Methodological characteristics of quality of questionnaire dimensions

The parameters of harassment and bullying actions within the organisation were repre-sented by 45 primary indications (test questions – steps), which were generalised intosix subscales (dimensions). Thus, the method of factorial analysis was chosen and asthe result the following subscales of harassment and bullying actions within the organ-isation were distinguished: communication, isolation, reputation, assignments, health anddamage (see Tables 1–6). Having applied the method of secondary factorial analysis,three scales defining harassment and bullying actions within the organisation weredistinguished: communication interferences in employees’ relationships, formation ofnegative opinion and the nature of work as well as employees’ physical state andconsequences.

It is known from research and practices of psychometrics that the test (diagnosticconstruct) can be successfully applied only when it has certain qualities: first of all,reliability and validity. These characteristics are detected after having performed specialresearch and psychometric calculations. The mentioned psychometric characteristics canbe quite high (see Table 1).

First of all, in order to identify what percentage of the total is explained by the sur-veyed object, the descriptive power or dispersion of the factor has been calculated andpresented. The factor should be interpreted if it explains not less than 10% of the disper-sion. If the explained dispersion of the factor is less than 10%, it would be necessary tosearch for the single test question, which decreases the dispersion of this generalisedfactor. The data of Table 1 shows that the explained dispersions of both distinguishedfactors noticeably exceed this lowest limit. In the communication subscale the explaineddispersion is 36.12%, and in the isolation subscale the dispersion is 59.17%.

The internal consistence reliability of the factor has been estimated after havingcalculated the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The testing theory indicates the acceptableinterval of the coefficient change 0.5 < a < 1; the large internal consistence of the test isshown by the high meanings of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient approaching 1. In orderto estimate the internal reliability of the subscales of communication interference in theemployees’ communication within the organisation (N = 799, N items = 15), the


Table

1.Characteristicsof

themetho

dologicalqu

ality

ofthedimension

sof

commun

icationinterferencesin

employ

ees’

relatio

nships.

Testsubscales

Nitems

Exp

lained

dispersion

%Cronb

ach’salph

aSpearman-Brown

Factorial

weigh

t(L)

Item

-total

correlation

(r/itt)

Mean

Min

Max

Mean

Min

Max

Com

mun

ication

1136

.12

0.85

0.79

0.59

0.41

0.78

0.34

0.06

0.86

Isolation

559

.17

0.89

0.88

0.77

0.67

0.81

0.58

0.25

0.82

Sou

rce:

Autho

rs’calculations.


calculated Cronbach’s alpha fluctuates from 0.85 to 0.89. The obtained rather highCronbach’s alpha meanings allows us to state that the items of the subscales included inthe instrument are resiliently related and are appropriate to diagnose communicationinterference in employees’ relationships. However, the size of the Cronbach’s alphacoefficient depends on the length of the scale – the more single questions which makethe scale, the larger it can be. Thus, when the scale involves more than five single teststeps, it is difficult to identify the real value and the additional measure of the internalreliability of the scale, which would be more sensitive for measurements, if necessary.So the meanings of the Spearman-Brown coefficient – which are more frequently lessthan the meanings of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient as it is accepted in the test theory– are more often presented alongside the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. In this particularcase they fluctuate from 0.79 to 0.88.

The resolution (differential power of the test steps [tasks]) or the correlation coeffi-cient of the total item r/itt is the indicator of methodological quality of the test. Thetests, which are based not on the solution of cognitive or logical problems, but on theexpression of opinions, require that the coefficient of the resolution would not dropbelow the 0.20 limit. The appropriate estimations of the indicators of the communicationinterference scale in the presented test fluctuate from 0.34 on the communication sub-scale to 0.58 on the isolation subscale. The minimal requirements are significantlyexceeded.

Referring to the model of the factorial analysis of the main components, the factorialweight of the test step L shows the cohesion of the variable statistical relationship. It isexpressed by the correlation coefficient between the variable and extracted factor. Theliterature indicates that factorial weights are considered to be high in case their estima-tion does drop below 0.6. The appropriate mean estimations of the indicators of thecommunication interference scale in the analysed test fluctuate from 0.59 to 0.77. It isevident that this condition has been met as well.

As the qualitative characteristics of both the obtained subscales of the test of com-munication interference in employees’ relations are quite high, it is necessary to performthe secondary factorial analysis. The secondary factorisation has been performed by twodifferent methods: the method of Principal Components and the method of Alfa Factor-ing in order to check the test dimensionality. During both factorisations the indicators ofthe methodological quality have been high (see Table 2).

By means of both methods of the factorial analysis one factor with the obtainedfactorial weights of the subscales, which exceeds 0.8, has been distinguished from bothsubscales, and the explained dispersion of the factor is much more than 70%. Thisshows that it is possible to speak about communication interferences in the employees’relations as an integral (one-dimensional) dimension.

Table 2. The results of the secondary factorial analysis of the scale of communication interfer-ences in employees’ relationships.

Test subscales Principal components (model of Factor 1) F1 Alpha factoring F1

Isolation 0.94 0.87Communication 0.94 0.87Explained dispersion 87.74% 75.41%

Source: Authors’ calculations.


It is necessary to discuss the characteristics of two scales (dimensions) NegativeOpinion Formation and Work Character and Employees’ Physical State andConsequences, distinguished in the diagnostic test of harassment and bullying actions inan organisation (see Table 3).

As the data presented in Table 3 shows, the characteristics of the methodologicalquality in the scale of the negative opinion formation and work character are highenough and do not drop much beyond the relative measures identified in the above-discussed scale. In this scale quite high factorial weights of the test steps (on the aver-age the factorial weights fluctuate from 0.60 in the reputation subscale to 0.68 in thetasks subscale) dominate as well. The resolution of the test steps also exceeds theminimal limit – it fluctuates from 0.35 in the reputation subscale to 0.45 in the taskssubscale. The meaning of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the intrinsic consistencymeasure also fluctuates around 0.9, and the Spearman-Brown around 0.8.

Having identified the methodological characteristics of the quality in the subscalesof the negative opinion and work character, their secondary factorisation has been per-formed by applying two different methods: Principal Components Method and AlphaFactoring Method (Table 4).

The dispersion obtained during the secondary factorisation of the scale Formation ofnegative opinion and work character in the test on the harassment and bullying actionsin the organisation is slightly lower than the one of the above-presented scale and itfluctuates from 63.44% (by using the Alpha factoring method) to 81.77% (by using thePrincipal Components method). The factorial weights of the subscales reach quite highestimations: 0.80–0.90 (see Table 5). Even though the indicators of the subscale ofHarm are pretty high, it is supposed that in the future this subscale should be extendedto include the items regarding the economic losses suffered by the organisation that donot prevent mobbing on time or allow competent employees to quit their job.

The data presented in Table 5 shows that the characteristics of the methodologicalquality of the employees’ physical state and consequences scale are also quite high.High enough factorial weights of the test steps, which fluctuate from 0.65 to 0.77, domi-nate. As previously mentioned, the factorial weights are considered high in case theirvalue does not drop lower than 0.6. It is evident that this condition is met and exceeded.The distinctive power of the test steps (tasks), the average meaning of which should benot less than 0.2, is a very important indicator of the methodological quality of the test.The appropriate values of the indicators of the employees’ physical state and conse-quences scale in the presented test ranges from 0.44 to 0.58 and visibly show that theminimal requirements are exceeded (see Table 6). Involvement of economic losses inthe questionnaire, relating them to the damage to health would help diagnose the lossesrelated to the employee’s deteriorated health.

During the secondary factorial analysis the factorial weights of the componentsresidual on the scale Employees’ Physical State and Outcomes in the test of the harass-ment and bullying actions in the organisation do not drop below 0.7 of the value. Andthe explained dispersion is slightly less (i.e. around 55% to 78%); however, it disclosesquite fairly the strength of the respondents’ approval for this criterion.

Considering the obtained high enough characteristics of the methodological qualityof the subscales and having performed the secondary factorial analysis by applying twodifferent methods, it has been identified that in the further analysis of the results it ispossible to speak about the model of one factor as well (see Table 7).

During the secondary factorial analysis the factorial weights of the componentsresidual on the scale in the test of the harassment and bullying actions in the


Table

3.The

characteristicsof

metho

dologicalqu

ality

indimension

sof

negativ

eop

inionform

ationandtask

character.

Testsubscales

Nitems

Exp

lained

dispersion

%Cronb

ach’salph

aSpearman-Brown

Factorial

weigh

t(L)

Item

-total

correlation

(r/itt)

Mean

Min

Max

Mean

Min

Max

Reputation

1537

.36

0.89

0.86

0.60

0.36

0.73

0.35

0.03

0.76

Tasks

846

.05

0.88

0.78

0.68

0.58

0.79

0.45

0.08

0.82

Sou

rce:

Autho

rs’calculations.


organisation do not drop below 0.5 of the value, and the explained dispersion is slightlylower (i.e. around 54% to 61%); however, it discloses the fair strength of the respon-dents’ approval for this criterion.

From a psychometric viewpoint all presented arguments show that the createddiagnostic instrument (see the Appendix) of nagging and sneering actions in the organ-isation is distinguished by high enough methodological quality. Of course, in future the

Table 4. The results of the secondary factorial analysis on the scale of negative opinionformation and work character.


Tasks 0.90 0.80Reputation 0.90 0.80Explained dispersion 81.77% 63.44%


Table 6. The results of the secondary factorial analysis of employees’ physical state andconsequences scale.


Harm 0.88 0.74Health 0.88 0.74Explained dispersion 77.56% 55.03%


Table 7. The results of the scale’s secondary factorial analysis of nagging and sneering actionswithin the organisation.


Reputation 0.88 0.87Communication 0.85 0.79Isolation 0.80 0.74Health 0.77 0.73Tasks 0.75 0.70Harm 0.60 0.52Explained dispersion 60.94% 53.66%


Table 5. The characteristics of methodological quality in the dimensions of the employees’physical state and consequences.

Testsubscales

Nitems

Explaineddispersion

%Cronbach’s

alphaSpearman-Brown

Factorial weight(L)

Item-totalcorrelation (r/itt)

Mean Min Max Mean Min Max

Health 5 44.90 0.83 0.81 0.65 0.38 0.81 0.41 0.09 0.79Harm 3 60.54 0.85 − 0.77 0.67 0.83 0.58 0.32 0.86



reliability and validity of this test should be checked by means of other methods, e.g.the method of re-test (repeated measurements).

5. Conclusion and discussion

The diagnostic instrument has been formed by evaluating the contexts of organisationalmanagement and the social competence of a victim. In the article the attack togetherwith its expression is generally called harassment, particularly by identifying mobbing’sclassical features of expression according to Leymann. The items included in the ques-tionnaire allow measuring the strength of attack features, reactions of the victim and theorganisation. The items provide the possibility of identifying the reactions to mobbing(the victim of harassment) after having experienced the attack in employees’ relation-ships, danger source (sources), actions of colleagues and managers, as well as organisa-tional decisions, i.e. they involve levels of individuals and the organisation. Thereactions of the victim towards the experienced attack are identified by individual stepsof the test, namely decision-making and declination, the appeal to the attacker, manager,colleagues, family members, specialists of mental and physical health as well as lawand quitting the job, etc. Who helped within the organisation and beyond it has beenevaluated as has whether the help was efficient. In addition, by means of the question-naire the possibility for the initiative of the employee who had experienced the attack tosearch for help, alongside the readiness of the organisation to react. The means tomeasure this in sections of the actions of the employees and the organisation is also pro-vided. The social competitiveness of the victim during the conflict as well as preventiveand intervention efficiency of the organisational system (institutionalisation of the phe-nomenon in internal acts, collective agreement, managerial decisions and their timeli-ness) have been measured. It has been estimated whether the anti-mobbing meanspresent in the organisation are functional. That is can mobbing be discussed in internaldocuments of the organisation (e.g., in codes of ethics, collective agreements)?However, this remains unimplemented in practice. The hypothesis ‘The questionnaire issuitable to diagnose mobbing in employees’ relationships by systemically estimating theorganisational context of harassment at the workplace’ has been verified.

The performed calculations show that the diagnostic instrument of attack actionsapplied to mobbing in employees’ relationships in the psychometric viewpoint is distin-guished by rather high methodological quality. The items of the subscales included inthe instrument are closely related and are appropriate to diagnose communication inter-ference in employees’ relationships. The appropriate minimal requirements formulatedfor the estimations of indicators on the scale of the communication interferences in thepresented test are significantly exceeded. The condition, which is set for factorialweights, is met. In addition, the characteristics of the methodological quality of the scaleof employees’ physical state and consequences are also quite high; the high factorialweights of test steps dominate. The resolution of the test steps, the average value ofwhich should be not less than 0.2, has been exceeded.

It is anticipated that in the future studies the questionnaire will be supplemented bythe subscale of the economic damage, which is revealed in aspects of worseningemployee health, loss of working hours, compensations and other payouts.

Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.


ReferencesAndersson, S. I. (1996). Appraisal, coping, motivational factors and gender in vocational

rehabilitation. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 24, 161–168.Björkqvist, K. (2001). Social defeat as a stressor in humans. Psychology and Behavior, 73,

435–442.Björkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., & Österman, K. (1992). The direct and indirect aggression

scales. Vaasa, Finland: Department of Social Science, Ǻbo Akademi University.Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Hjelt-Bäck, M. (1994a). Aggression among university employees.

Aggressive Behavior, 20, 173–184.Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Lagerspetz, K. (1994b). Sex differences in covert aggression in

adults. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 27–33.Bultena, C. D. (2008). Bushwhacked at work: A comparative analysis of mobbing and bullying at

work. Proceedings of ASBBS, 15, 652–666.Burgi, N. (2014). Societies without citizens: The anomic impacts of labor market restructuring

and the erosion of social rights in Europe. European Journal of Social Theory, 17, 290–306.Classification of Economic Activities. (2008). Statistics Lithuania. Retrieved from http://web.s

tat.gov.lt/uploads/klasifik/EVRK/EVRK2red_lt.htmCooper, C. L., Dewe, P. J., & O‘Driscoll, M. P. (2001). Organizational stress: A review and

critique of theory, research, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Cowan, R. L. (2012). It’s complicated: Defining workplace bullying from the human resource

professional’s perspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 377–403.D’Cruz, P., & Rayner, C. (2013). Bullying in the Indian workplace: A study of the ITES-BPO

sector. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 34, 597–619.Duffy, M., & Sperry, L. (2007). Workplace mobbing: Individual and family health consequences.

The Family Journal, 15, 398–404.Einarsen, S., & Raknes, B. (1997). Harassment in the workplace and the victimisation of men.

Violence and Victims, 12, 247–263.Farrell, A., & Geist-Martin, P. (2005). Communicating social health: Perceptions of wellness at

work. Management Communication Quarterly, 18, 543–592.Fox, S., & Stallworth, L. E. (2010). The battered apple: An application of stressor-emotion-con-

trol/support theory to teachers’ experience of violence and bullying. Human Relations, 63,927–954.

Garot, R. (2014). Labor disorders in neoliberal Italy: Mobbing, well-being, and the workplace.Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 43, 719–721.

Harvey, M. G., Buckley, M. R., Heames, J. T., Zinko, R., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2007).A bully as an archetypal destructive leader. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,14, 117–129.

Hugh-Jones, D., & Zultan, R. (2013). Reputation and cooperation in defense. Journal of ConflictResolution, 57, 327–355.

Jenkins, C. D., Zyzanski, S. J., & Rosenman, R. H. (1971). Progress toward validation ofcomputer-scored test for the type A coronary-prone behavior pattern. Psychosomatic Medicine,33, 193–202.

Katrinli, A., Atabay, G., Gunay, G., & Cangarli, B. G. (2010). Nurses’ perceptions of individualand organizational political reasons for horizontal peer bullying. Nursing Ethics, 17, 614–627.

Kaukiainen, A., Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., & Forsblom, S. (1995). Peer-Estimated Social Intelligence (PESI). Turku, Finland: Department of Psychology, Universityof Turlor.

Leymann, H. (1990). Mobbing and psychological terror at workplaces. Violence and Victims, 5,119–126.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2003). The communicative cycle of employee emotional abuse: Generationand regeneration of workplace mistreatment. Management Communication Quarterly, 16,471–501.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2008). Intensive remedial identity work: Responses to workplace bullyingtrauma and stigmatization. Organization, 15, 97–119.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Tracy, S. J. (2012). Answering five key questions about workplace bully-ing: How communication scholarship provides thought leadership for transforming abuse atwork. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 3–47.


http://web.stat.gov.lt/uploads/klasifik/EVRK/EVRK2red_lt.htm

http://web.stat.gov.lt/uploads/klasifik/EVRK/EVRK2red_lt.htm

O’Donnell, S., MacIntosh, J., & Wuest, J. (2010). A theoretical understanding of sickness absenceamong women who have experienced workplace bullying. Qualitative Health Research, 20,439–452.

Pranjič, N., Maleš-Bilič, L., Beganlič, A., & Mustajbegovič, J. (2006). Mobbing, stress and workability index among physicians in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Survey study. Public Health, 47,750–758.

Schindeler, E. (2014). Workplace violence: Extending the boundaries of criminology. TheoreticalCriminology, 18, 371–385.

Tattersall, A. J., & Farmer, E. W. (1995). The regulation of work demands and strain. In S. LSauter & L. R Murphy (Eds.), Organizational risk factors for job stress (pp. 139–156).Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Testa, C. (2013). Crisis – What crisis? The jobless society and Italian cinema in the early 2000s.Forum Italicum: A Journal of Italian Studies, 47, 126–149.

Tracy, S. J., Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Alberts, J. K. (2006). Nightmares, demons, and slaves: Explor-ing the painful metaphors of workplace bullying. Management Communication Quarterly, 20,148–185.

Tuomi, K., Ilmarinen, J., Jahkola, A., Katajarinne, L., & Tulkki, A. (1994). Work ability index.Helsinki: Institute of Occupational Health.

Vveinhardt, J. (2012). Identification of the reliability of methodological characteristics of qualityin the diagnostic instrument for mobbing as discrimination in employee relations on purposeto improve the climate in Lithuanian organisations. Transformations in Business andEconomics, 11, 218–232.

Yildirim, D., Yildirim, A., & Timucin, A. (2007). Mobbing behaviors encountered by nurseteaching staff. Nursing Ethics, 14, 447–463.

Žukauskas, P., & Vveinhardt, J. (2011). Mobbing diagnosis instrument: Stages of construction,structure and connectedness of criteria. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 12,400–416.


Appendix 1. The structure of the questionnaire

Test scales Test subscales

Number ofitems inthe scale

Number ofitems in thesubscale

Numeration of itemsand/or questions inthe questionnaire

I. Mobbing features,prevention andintervention

1.1. Identificationof mobbingphenomenon

5 11 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 questions

1.2. Measures todiminish mobbingphenomenon

6 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11questions

II. Communicationinterferences inemployees’relations

2.1.Communication

11 16

47

12.1–12.11 items

2.2. Isolation 5 12.12–12.16 items

III. Formation ofnegative opinionand work character

3.1. Reputation 15 23 12.17–12.31 items3.2. Tasks 8 12.32–12.39 items

IV. Employees’physical state andconsequences

4.1. Health 5 8 12.40–12.44 items4.2. Harm 3 12.45–12.47 items

V. Socio-demographiccharacteristics

10 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,19, 20, 21, 22questions


Appendix

2.Question

naire

Mobbingan

dSingleCases

ofHarassm

entin

Employees’

Relations(M

SCH).

I.Mob

bing

features,preventio

nan

dinterventio

nQuestions

Specificatio

n

1.1.

Identificatio

nof

mob

bing

phenom

enon

1.Haveyo

uexperiencedharassment,bu

llyingin

your

work?

Thisqu

estio

nisaimed

todisassociate

from

therespon

dentswho

have

not

experiencedharassmentin

theirwork

Yes

No

Ifyo

uansw

ered

‘No’,do

notfillin

thequ

estio

nnaire;answ

erthe1stand

13th

questio

nson

lyWhenthequ

estio

nnaire

isused

byfilling

inits

electron

icversion,

this

insertionisnecessaryto

beable

toidentifywhatdistribu

tionof

the

respon

dentswho

have

participated

inthesurvey

isaccordingto

thefields

ofprofession

alactiv

ityThisinsertionisaimed

toidentifyho

wmanyrespon

dents

have

searched

fortheinform

ationin

thespecialised

website

www.m

obingas.lt

andhave

opened

thequ

estio

nnaire

2.Ifyes,ho

wlong

hastheharassment(bullying)

takenplace?

Thisqu

estio

nisaimed

toidentifywhether

inrespectof

duratio

nthe

respon

dent

hasexperiencedharassmentor

mob

bing

.Thatisup

tosixmon

ths

(referring

tothedefinitio

nof

H.Leymann)

itwou

ldbe

identified

that

the

employ

eehasexperiencedharassment;if6mon

thsandmore,

itispo

ssible

toassumethat

theem

ploy

eeexperiencesmob

bing

(sub

ject

towhatansw

erwill

beto

the3rdqu

estio

n)Upto

six

mon

ths

Six

mon

thsandmoreOther

(please,

specify)

……

……

…The

variantof

theansw

er‘O

ther’isaimed

fortherespon

dent

towrite

inim

portantadditio

nalinform

ationat

discretio

n,forexam

ple,

that

theharassment

lasted

formorethan

severalsuccessive

years

3.How

oftenhasharassment(bullying)

takenplace?

The

frequencyof

harassmentisidentifi

edby

means

ofthisqu

estio

nNot

less

than

once

aweek

According

tothedefinitio

nof

H.Leymann,

incase

ofmob

bing

,harassment

hasto

reoccurno

tless

than

once

aweek.

Inexceptionalcasesthefrequency

canbe

notso

intensiveor

vice

versa–particularly

intensive.

Thu

s,theop

tion

oftheansw

er‘O

ther’hasbeen

included,so

therespondent

canindicate,for

exam

ple,

that

harassmentoccurs

everydayor

everyotherweek

Lessthan

once

aweek

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

For

exam

ple,

ithasbecomeevidentthat

thevictim

hadbeen

intensively

attacked;ho

wever,accordingto

theclassicaldefinitio

n,he/she

couldno

thave

been

named

asaperson

experiencing

mob

bing

becausehe/she

hasbeen

working

bytherolling

schedu

le,which

influenced

his/hermeetin

gswith

the

aggressor

(Con

tinued)


http://www.mobingas.lt

Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

I.Mob

bing

features,preventio

nan

dinterventio

nQuestions

Specificatio

n

4.Who

was

aharasser,bu

lly?

Inorderto

identifythedirectionof

harassment(horizon

tal,vertical,ho

rizontal

andvertical)forpo

sitio

nshave

been

distingu

ished:

horizontal

(one

employ

eeagainstanother),ho

rizontal

(several

colleaguesagainston

eem

ploy

ee),vertical

(the

manager

againsthis/hersubo

rdinateor

thesubo

rdinateagainstthe

manager),ho

rizontal

andvertical

(the

manager

andcolleaguestogether).This

questio

ndo

esno

taim

toidentifystaffing

whensubo

rdinates

conspire

against

thefemalemanager

Acolleague

Several

colleagues

The

manager

Boththemanager

andcolleagues

5.How

have

youreactedto

harassment(bullying)?Indicate

allsuitable

variants:

The

respon

dent

issugg

estedto

nameseveralansw

ers,andifthereisno

suitableansw

er–to

write

his/herow

nansw

er.The

presentedvariantsof

the

answ

ersarestereotyped;

thus,thereactio

nof

theem

ploy

eewritteninto

the

variant‘O

ther’canbe

very

useful

inextend

ing(specifying)

thecompetenceof

thevictim

todeal

with

theprob

lem,his/herbehaviou

rmod

el

Ihaven’tdo

neanything

Ihave

askedto

stop

Ihave

inform

edthemanager

Ihave

addressedapsycho

logist

Ihave

addressedapsycho

therapist

Ihave

told

acolleague

(colleagues)

Ihave

askedto

bemov

edaw

ayfrom

theharasser

(harassers)

Ihave

addressedthetrade-un

ion

Ihave

takenlegaladvice

Ihave

told

friend

s,family

mem

bers

Ihave

hand

edthewrittenaresign

ationletter

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

1.2.

Measuresto

diminishmob

bing

phenom

enon

6.Who

hasprov

ided

youwith

supp

ortandhelp?

Astheprevious

questio

nhasaimed

toidentifytheactsof

thevictim

whenhe/

shehadexperiencedharassment,thisqu

estio

naimsto

identifytheperson

who

hasprov

ided

help.The

comparisonof

the5thand6thqu

estio

nisparticularly

sign

ificant

becauseitisim

portantto

find

outwhether

thevictim

hasgo

tassistance,forexam

ple,

from

themanager

ifhe/she

addressednamelythe

manager,etc

Indicate

allsuitableansw

ers:

The

manager

Psycholog

ist

Psychiatrist

Trade-union

Law

yer(atto

rney

)Friends,family

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

I.Mob

bing

features,preventio

nan

dinterventio

nQuestions

Specificatio

n

7.Haveanyactio

nsbeen

takento

preventbu

llying,

harassment?

Independ

entof

whether

theassistance

hasbeen

prov

ided

(the

6thqu

estio

n),it

isnecessaryto

identifywhether

thevictim

know

sabouttheactio

ns,which

had

been

taken(orno

t)to

preventthemob

bing

phenom

enon

intheorganisatio

nYes

No

Ido

n’tkn

owIfthevariantof

theansw

er‘Ido

n’tkn

ow’ischosen,itisidentified

that

the

victim

hasnotbeen

inform

edabouttheactio

nstakento

preventworkplace

mob

bing

Thisshow

sno

ton

lythepresence

orabsenceof

thefeedback,bu

talso

notes

abou

tcommun

ication,

policyof

publicity,which

arerelevant

toov

ercome

mob

bing

Ifyo

uhave

answ

ered

thisqu

estio

n‘N

o’,proceedto

the11th

questio

nIftheprevious

questio

nhasbeen

answ

ered

negativ

ely,

the8th,

9thand10th

questio

nsareno

tto

beansw

ered.Sotherespon

dent

proceeds

tothe11th

questio

n8.

IfYES,who

hastakentheactio

ns?

Ifthe7thqu

estio

nisansw

ered

positiv

ely,

therespon

dent

isaskedto

specify

who

hadtakentheactio

nswith

thepu

rposeto

compare

with

whathasbeen

identified

previously,i.e.thereactio

nof

thevictim

toharassment(the

5th

questio

n),therescuer(the

6thqu

estio

n)

The

manager

Colleagues

Trade-union

Law

enforcem

entauthorities

The

listisno

tfinal

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

9.IfYES,whatweretheconsequences

fortheharasser

(harassers)?

The

respon

dent

isgiventhepo

ssibility

tochoo

seon

eor

severalvariantsof

the

answ

ers,subjectto

thesituationhe/she

hadexperienced.

Itisaimed

toidentify

whatactio

nsaretakenor

notagainsttheaggressor.For

exam

ple,

inLith

uania

itisatyp

ical

touselegalinstruments–du

ring

thedecade

only

twolawsuits,

which

mentio

ntheattack

characteristic

tomob

bing

,go

tto

thecourt

Noconsequences

Verbalwarning

Disciplinarypenalty

was

impo

sed

Institu

tions

oflaw

enforcem

enthave

been

inform

edThe

answ

ersallow

checking

whether

therespon

dentshave

honestly

answ

ered

theprevious

questio

ns.The

variantof

theansw

er‘Ido

n’tkn

ow’isrelatedto

possible

prob

lemsin

organisatio

nalcommun

ication,

publicity

insolving

mob

bing

confl

icts

The

harasser(s)hasmaderestitu

tion

Adm

inistrativeactio

nor

crim

inal

prosecutionwas

appliedagainsta

harasser

(harassers)

Ido

n’tkn

owOther

(please,

specify)…

……

……

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

I.Mob

bing

features,preventio

nan

dinterventio

nQuestions

Specificatio

n

10.Whatactio

nhasthemanager/organisationmadeafterthisevent?

The

questio

nisaimed

toanalysetheinterventio

nandpreventio

nsystem

ofthe

organisatio

n.In

additio

n,itpartly

notesabou

tthepo

ssible

prob

lemsof

managem

entcultu

re,which

arerelatedto

confl

ictmanagem

entand

organisatio

nalclim

ate

The

situationwas

givenpu

blicity

intheorganisatio

nas

anintolerable

exam

ple

The

manager

haspu

blicly

demon

stratedintoleranceof

harassment,

bully

ing

The

situationhasbeen

discussedwith

colleagues

The

profession

alspecialist(con

sultant)hasbeen

invited

The

seminar

aimed

atpreventio

nof

harassmentat

theworkp

lace

hasbeen

held

Noactio

nshave

been

made

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

11.In

ourorganisatio

n:Tog

etherwith

theabov

e-presentedqu

estio

nsandvariantsof

theansw

ersitis

specified

how

mob

bing

confl

ictsaresolved

atorganisatio

nallevel,streng

ths

and/or

prob

lematic

fields

oftheorganisatio

narehigh

lighted

You

canalwaysaddressthemanager

ifyo

uhave

experiencedbu

llyingand

harassmentandgetsomehelp

Bullyingandharassmentarediscussedin

thecollectiveagreem

ent


thecode

ofethics,which

isfollo

wed


thecode

ofethics;ho

wever,itis

notfollo

wed

Noattentionhasbeen

givento

mob

bing

andharassmentin

thecollective

agreem

ent

Duringtheem

ploymentprocess,psychologicaltestswereapplied

Itisuselessto

addressthemanager

ifyo

uhadexperiencedbu

llyingand

harassment

Trainings

andseminars,where

itisexplainedho

wto

avoidpsycho

logical

andph

ysical

violence

and/or

how

tobehave

whenacolleague

commits

actsof

violence,areheld.

Colleaguesalwaysrend

ertheirassistance

Colleaguesareindifferentor

supp

orttheharasser

The

specialistwho

rend

erspsycho

logicalandotherassistance

isavailable.

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

II.Com

mun

icationinterferencesin

employees’

relatio

nsQuestions

2.1.

Com

mun

ication

12.Indicate

bywhatactio

nsyo

uhave

experiencedbu

llying,

harassment:

12.1.The

manager

does

notallow

meto

expressmyop

inion

12.1.Mycolleaguesdo

notallow

meto

expressmyop

inion

12.1.WhenIspeak,

somebod

yconstantly

interrup

tsme

12.1.Iam

shou

tedat,loud

lyabused

12.1.Produ

ctivity

ofmyworkiscriticised

12.1.Myperson

allifeiscriticised

12.1.Iam

terrorised

over

theph

one

12.1.Iwas

threatened

verbally

12.1.Iwas

threatened

inwritin

g12

.1.Theyavoidedcontactwith

meby

show

ingdisdainful

glancesor

gestures

12.11.

Theyavoidedcontactwith

meby

doingindirect

cues

2.2.

Isolation

12.12.

Nob

odytalksto

me,

commun

icates

with

me

12.13.

Colleaguesdo

notallow

meto

commun

icatewith

them

12.14.

Myworkp

lace

hasbeen

mov

edto

anotherroom

,fartherfrom

mycolleagues

12.15.

Colleaguesareforbiddento

commun

icatewith

me

12.16.

Iam

treatedas

‘anem

ptyplace’

III.Formationof

nega

tiveop

inionan

dworkcharacter

3.1.

Reputation

12.17.

Theydisparagemebehind

myback

12.18.

False

rumou

rsweredissem

inated

abou

tme

12.19.

Iam

sneered,

mocked

12.20.

The

storygo

esthat

Ihave

mentalprob

lems

12.21.

Ihear

hintsthat

Ishou

ld‘visitapsychiatrist’

12.22.

Theylaug

hat

myph

ysical

limitatio

ns12

.23.

Mywalking

,gestures,speech

aremocked

12.24.

Ihave

been

attacked

dueto

mypo

litical

view

s

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

III.Formationof

nega

tiveop

inionan

dworkcharacter

Questions

12.25.

Ihave

been

attacked

dueto

myrelig

ious

view

s12

.26.

Theymockat

mynatio

nality

12.27.

Theymockat

mysocial

origin

12.28.

Myworkisevaluatedun

fairly,offensively

12.29.

Mydecisionsarecontinuously

doubted

12.30.

Ontheneck

Ihear

badlang

uage,offensiveph

rases,remarks

andso

on12

.31.

Ihave

heardremarks

abou

tsexu

alrelatio

nsor

offers

tomakelove

3.2.

Tasks

12.32.

Ido

notgetanyworktasks

12.33.

Ido

nothave

thepo

ssibility

todo

anything

atmywork

12.34.

Igetmeaning

less

worktasks

12.35.

The

tasksexceedingmypo

wer

have

been

assign

ed12

.36.

Iconstantly

getvo

latiletasks

12.37.

Iam

forced

toperform

thetaskshu

miliatingmyself-esteem

12.38.

Igetoffensiveworktasks

12.39.

Ihave

gottheworktasksthat

exceed

myqu

alificatio

nin

orderto

“discredit”me

IV.Employees’

physical

statean

dconsequences

4.1.

Health

12.40.

Ihadto

perform

thetasksharm

fulformyhealth

12.41.

Ihave

heardthreatsto

useph

ysical

forceagainstme

12.42.

Slig

htph

ysical

violence

hasbeen

used

againstmebecauseIshou

ldhave

been

“taugh

t”12

.43.

Theybehave

with

meparticularly

harshly

12.44.

Ihave

experiencedsexu

alassault

4.2.

Harm

12.45.

The

direct

materialharm

hasbeen

done

12.46.

The

direct

materialharm

hasbeen

done

atmyho

me

12.47.

The

situations,becauseof

which

Iexperience

materialexpenses,arespecially

created

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

V.So

cio-demog

raph

iccharacteristics

Questions

13.Fieldsof

your

profession

alactiv

ity:

Fieldsof

profession

alactiv

ity1

Specificatio

nAgriculture

Thissectioncontains

theactiv

ities

relatedto

theuseof

vegetables,anim

als

andnature

resources;they

covercrop

grow

ing,

anim

albreeding

,tim

ber

hand

lingas

wellas

theou

tput

ofothervegetable,

anim

alsor

theirprod

uctsin

farm

sor

nature

rang

es

Forestry

Fishing

Miningandqu

arrying

Thissectionconsistsof

theactiv

itytypesrelatedto

theextractio

nof

mineral

resources,which

arenaturally

foun

din

solid

(coalandore),liq

uid(oil)or

gas

(natural

gas)

form

Manufacturing

Thissectioninclud

estheph

ysical

orchem

ical

change

ofmaterials,

environm

entsor

theircompo

nentswith

new

prod

ucts

Electricity,gas,steam

andaircond

ition

ingsupp

lyThissectionclassifies

theactiv

ityrelatedto

thesupp

lyof

electric

power,

naturalgas,steam,ho

twater

byusingperm

anentinfrastructure

(networks)of

supp

lylin

es,mains

andpipelin

es.The

size

ofthenetworkisno

tthedecisive

factor;italso

invo

lves

thesupp

lyof

electricity,gas,steam,ho

twater

andthe

liketo

indu

strial

districtsor

residentialbu

ildings

Thu

sthissectioninclud

estheexploitatio

nof

electricity

andgassystem

s,which

generate,controlanddistribu

teelectric

power

orgas.Italso

includ

esthesupp

lyof

steam

andair-cond

ition

ing

Water

supp

ly,sewerage,

waste

managem

entandremediatio

nactiv

ities

Thissectioninclud

estheactiv

ity,which

isrelatedto

themanagem

entof

differentwaste,e.g.

solid

andnon-solid

industrial

orhouseholdwaste,as

well

asof

contam

inated

constructio

nsites(including

debriscollecting,

processing

andremov

al).The

prod

uctsgo

tin

theprocessof

water

andsewagetreatm

ent

canbe

removed

orused

inothermanufacturing

processes.The

section

includ

eswater

supp

lyactiv

itybecauseitisoftencarriedou

ttogether

with

the

exploitatio

nof

sewagepu

rifyingdevice

oritisperformed

byotherenterprises

engagedin

sewerage

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

V.So

cio-demog

raph

iccharacteristics

Questions

Con

struction

Thissectioninclud

esgeneralconstructio

nof

build

ings

andengineering

structures

andspecialconstructio

nworks.Thiscanbe

new

constructio

n,repair,constructio

nor

reconstructio

nof

enlargem

ents,mou

ntingof

prefabricatedbu

ildings

orstructures

intheconstructio

nsite,as

wellas

the

constructio

nof

tempo

rary

build

ings

Who

lesale

andretail

Thissectiondealswith

who

lesale

andretailof

differentgo

ods(i.e.sale

with

outprocessing

)andtheprov

isionof

theservices

characteristic

fortrade.

Thissectionalso

includ

esmaintenance

ofmotor

vehicles

andmotorcycles

Maintenance

ofmotor

vehicles

andmotorcycles

Transpo

rtationandstorage

Thissectioninclud

estransportatio

nof

passengers

andcargo,

schedu

ledor

not

schedu

led;

transportatio

nof

cargoby

railw

ay,road,water,airandpipesas

wellas

therelatedactiv

itysuch

asthefunctio

ning

oftransportterm

inalsand

parking,

cargohand

ling,

storageandthelik

e.Thissectionalso

dealswith

the

rent

oftransportequipm

entwith

driver

orop

erator

recruitm

ent.Thissection

also

includ

estheactiv

ityof

postandcouriers

Foo

dserviceactiv

ities


short-stay

accommod

ationforvisitors

andother

travellers

aswellas

prov

isionof

readymealsandbeveragesmeant

for

immediate

consum

ption

Accom

mod

ationactiv

ities

Inform

ationandcommun

ication

The

sectiondealswith

prod

uctio

nanddissem

inationof

inform

ationand

cultu

reprod

ucts;thesupp

lyof

measures,which

allow

conv

eyingor

spreading

theseprod

ucts,as

wellas

data

ormessages;theactiv

ityrelatedto

inform

ation

techno

logies,data

processing

andotherinform

ationservices

Financial

andinsuranceactiv

ities


theactiv

ityof

financialservices

that

includ

einsurance,

reinsuranceandpensionfund

ingas

wellas

theactiv

itymaintaining

financial

services

Alsothissectioninvo

lves

theactiv

ityof

investment(asset)storage,

i.e.the

activ

ityof

holdingcompanies

andtrusts,fund

sandsimilarfinancial

institu

tions

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

V.So

cio-demog

raph

iccharacteristics

Questions

Realestate

activ

ities

Thissectioninclud

estheactiv

ityof

peop

lefunctio

ning

aslessors,agentsand

(or)brok

ersin

oneor

morefields

presented:

sale

orpu

rchase

ofreal

estate,

real

estate

forrent,theactiv

ityof

otherservices

relatedto

real

estate,e.g.

real

estate

appraisalor

theactiv

ityof

thereal

estate

escrow

agent.Thissectionalso

dealswith

theconstructio

nof

build

ings

bymaintaining

theprop

erty

ofthese

build

ings

orrentingthem

.The

sectionalso

includ

estheactiv

ityof

real

estate

managers

Professional,scientificandtechnicalactiv

ities

Thissectioninclud

esspecialised

profession

al,scientificandtechnicalactiv

ity.

Thisactiv

ityrequ

ires

high

levelof

readiness;du

eto

itspecialkn

owledg

eand

skillsbecomeavailableto

consum

ers

Adm

inistrativeandserviceactiv

ities

Thissectioninclud

esvariou

sactiv

ities,which

maintaingeneralop

erations

ofbu

siness

Pub

licadministrationanddefence

Thissectioninvo

lves

thetypesof

stateandself-gov

ernm

entactiv

ities,which

aremostfrequently

performed

bypu

blic

administrationinstitu

tions.Itdeals

with

theadop

tionof

lawsandlegalactsaccompany

ingthem

andtheirlegal

interpretatio

n,as

wellas

managem

entof

theprog

rammes

basedon

them

;legislativeactiv

ities;themanagem

entof

tax,

defence,

public

orderand

security,im

migratio

ninstitu

tions,as

wellas

offoreignaffairsandgo

vernment

prog

rammes.Thissectionalso

contains

theactiv

ityof

compu

lsory(state)

social

security

Com

pulsorysocial

security

Edu

catio

nThissectioninclud

eseducationof

anylevelor

ofanyprofession

.Edu

catio

ncanbe

organisedorally

orin

written,

aswellas

byradio,

television

,the

Internet

orcorrespo

ndence

Thissectioncontains

theeducationim

plem

entedby

differentinstitu

tions

ofregular(traditio

nal)educationsystem

atits

differentlevels,as

wellas

adult

education,

prog

rammes

forelim

inationof

illiteracy

andso

on.Alsoat

respectiv

elevelsthissectioninvo

lves

military

scho

olsandacadem

ies,prison

schoolsandso

on.The

sectiondealswith

both

stateandprivateeducation

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

V.So

cio-demog

raph

iccharacteristics

Questions

Hum

anhealth

care

andsocial

work

Thissectioninclud

estheactiv

ityof

human

health

care

andsocial

work

Itinvo

lves

awiderang

eof

activ

ities

startin

gfrom

thehealth

care

prov

ided

byqu

alified

medical

profession

alsin

hospitalsor

otherinstitu

tions,ov

erresidentialcare

whentheactiv

ityof

social

workon

lypartly

relatesto

the

activ

ityof

health

care

performed

with

outtheinvo

lvem

entof

health

care

profession

als

Arts,entertainm

entandrecreatio

nalactiv

ities

Thissectioninclud

esdifferentactiv

ities

that

meetcultu

ral,entertainm

entand

recreatio

nalneedsof

thegeneralpu

blic,which

includ

eliv

eperformances,

operationof

museums,gambling,

sportsandrecreatio

nactiv

ities

Other

serviceactiv

ities

Thissection(asaresidu

alcatego

ry)includ

estheactiv

ities

ofmem

bership

organisatio

ns,compu

termaintenance,repairof

person

alandho

useholdgo

ods,

aswellas

avarietyof

person

alserviceactiv

ities

notcoveredelsewhere

Activities

ofextraterritorial

organisatio

nsThisgrou

pinclud

es•

theactiv

ityof

internationalorganisatio

nssuch

astheUnitedNations

andthespecialised

agencies,region

alun

itsof

thissystem

–InternationalMon

etaryFun

d,World

Bank,

World

Customs

Organization,

OrganizationforEcono

mic

Co-op

erationand

Develop

ment,Organizationof

Petroleum

Exp

ortin

gCou

ntries,the

EU,Europ

eanFreeTrade

Associatio

netc.

Thisgrou

palso

contains:

•activ

ities

ofdiplom

atic

andconsular

mission

srepresentin

gcoun

tries,

ifthey

areregistered

intheaccommod

atingcoun

try

14.You

workfor:

Itisim

portantto

evaluate

thesituationof

theorganisatio

nsreferableto

the

econ

omic

activ

ityaccordingto

thesectorsby

orientingto

future

more

specified

researches

(for

exam

ple,

oncultu

reandclim

ate)

Private

sector

Pub

licsector

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

V.So

cio-demog

raph

iccharacteristics

Questions

15.You

are:

For

specificatio

nof

mob

bing

andotheractio

nsof

harassmentas

wellas

evaluatio

nof

organisatio

nalsystem

,subjectto

thestatus

with

inthe

organisatio

nThe

topmanager

The

middle-levelmanager

The

lower-level

manager

The

subo

rdinate

16.Position

(desirable):…

……

……

The

questio

nto

specifybu

tno

top

tional

17.You

rworkexperience

atthepresentworkp

lace:

The

previous

research

have

identifi

edthat

therisk

toexperience

theattack

existsin

thebeginn

ingof

one’scareer,andvictim

ssuffer

mob

bing

notfora

year

becausethecultu

rebeingsurveyed

isdistingu

ishedby

low

workmob

ility,

especially

forolderpeop

leandpu

blic

sector

employ

ees

Upto

1year

1–3years

4–7years

8–10

years

11–15years

16–20yearsOther

(please,

specify)…

……

……

18.The

numberof

employ

eesworking

atyo

urorganisatio

n:Itisaimed

tospecifythecausal/outcomerelatio

nshipof

mob

bing

(harassm

ent)

expression

with

thesize

andmanagem

entof

theorganisatio

nUpto

10em

ploy

ees

Morethan

10,bu

tless

than

50em

ploy

ees

From

50to

250em

ploy

ees

Morethan

250em

ployees

19.You

rmaritalstatus:

One

ofthesocio-demog

raph

iccriteria,

forexam

ple,

relatedto

stigmatism

Single

Married

Divorced

Livingtogether

with

outgetting

married

Other

(please,

specify)…

……

……

(Con

tinued)


Appendix

2.(Con

tinued)

V.So

cio-demog

raph

iccharacteristics

Questions

20.You

rage:

The

ageiselaborated

inintervalsandparticularly

impo

rtantfocusesare

distingu

ished:

‘morethan

60yearsold,

butnotretired’and‘the

retirem

ent

age’.Whenperformingthereform

ofpensions

inLith

uania,

in20

12men

retired

attheageof

62yearsand8mon

ths;wom

enat

60yearsand4mon

ths;

andin

2013

62yearsand10

mon

thsand60

yearsand8mon

thsrespectiv

ely

(exceptspecificprofession

s,forexam

ple,

policeofficers).The

retirem

entage

hasbeen

high

lighted

dueto

sign

ificant

stigmatisation.

Inadditio

n,the

beginningof

theresearches

ofLeymannhasalso

been

inspired

byalarge

numberof

employ

eesin

Sweden

who

hadlefttheirjobbefore

reaching

the

retirem

entage

Upto

20years

21–30

31–40

41–50

51–60

Morethan

60,bu

tno

tretired

The

retirem

entage

21.You

reducation:

Please,

specify:

……

……

…Respo

ndentsareadvisedto

write

intheireducationbecausetheprevious

practicehasshow

nthat

respon

dentsoftenwishto

statethat

they

have

several

diplom

asof

higher

education,

i.e.he/she

hasacquired

notonly

theBachelor’s

degree,bu

talso

Master’sor

Doctor’sdegree,continueshis/herstud

ies,ison

academ

icleave–andalotof

othervariants.The

answ

ersto

thisqu

estio

ncomplem

entthepo

rtraitof

avictim

.In

additio

n,itcanshow

thecoherenceof

person

’scompetenceandeducationas

wellas

serveformoreexplicitfuture

researches

relatedto

educationalsystem

inevaluatin

gthereadinessof

both

employ

eesandmanagersin

respectof

mob

bing

confl

icts

22.You

rgend

erSom

eresearchershave

recorded

mod

eratedifferencesbetweenmob

bing

particularity

inrespectof

gend

er;on

thecontrary,others

statethat

nodifferencesoccur.Thisquestio

nisaimed

toverify

(ordeny

)mobbing

and

harassmentof

victim

sbasedon

gend

er

Fem

ale

Male

Note:

Itisadvisableto

adaptsomesocio-demog

raph

iccriteriawhencarrying

outresearch

indifferentcoun

tries.

1Referring

totheClassificatio

nof

Econo

mic

Activities

oftheRepub

licof

Lith

uania.


The questionnaire for diagnosing mobbing in employees ...

Documents

Transcript of The questionnaire for diagnosing mobbing in employees ...