Do they stay or do they go?: A longitudinal study of intentions to leave and exclusion from working life among targets of workplace bullying
Purpose – This study aims to explore relationships between exposure to bullying at work and intention to leave the organisation, actual leaving the workplace, and exclusion from working life through sick leave or rehabilitation or disability pension. Design/methodology/approach – A prospective design with two surveys of a national representative sample of the Norwegian work force was used (n=1,775). The response rate at the first data collection in 2005 was 56.4 per cent, and 70 per cent at the second data collection in 2007. Bullying was measured using two measurement methods: self-labelled victims of bullying and exposure to bullying behaviour, respectively. Findings – This study shows partial support for Leymann's assumption that bullying at work will lead to exclusion from working life. Logistic regressions showed that victims of bullying considered leaving their work more often than did individuals who were not bullied, on both measurement times. The results also showed that victims have changed employer more often than non-victims. However, most victims are still working full time or part time two years later. Practical implications – Prevention of workplace bullying must be handled through procedures on an organisational level. Rehabilitation programs and reintegration must be offered for employees unable to stay in their job. Counselling should be available for those who experience bullying or consider leaving their job. Originality/value – To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study examining bullying, intention to leave, turnover and exclusion from working life with a prospective longitudinal design.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 32 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
Pages: 178 - 193
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ijm.htm Email:
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:32:y:2011:i:2:p:178-193. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.