Örnek Makale
Abstract
…..
- INTRODUCTION
Psychological violence in the workplace is often referred to as mobbing or emotional harassment in the literature and is said to have serious effects on organizational functioning (Einarsen, 1999). This phenomenon may not only prevent employees from having a productive and healthy working environment, but may also lead to a decrease in individuals’ professional satisfaction, damage their sense of belonging to the organization, and especially a decline in their intrinsic motivation (Leymann, 1990). The decrease in intrinsic motivation leads to a decrease in organizational productivity as a result of the individual’s lack of interest in his/her job or perceiving his/her job only as an external obligation (Kivimaki, Elovainio & Vahtera, 2000). In this process, understanding the dimensions and causes of psychological violence helps us to see both the theoretical and practical reflections of the phenomenon. Therefore, this issue is becoming increasingly important in terms of human resources management and employee welfare in organizations (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006).
In recent years, many studies have been conducted on psychological violence in the workplace, and within the framework of these studies, undesirable consequences such as stress, anxiety, depression or burnout have been revealed (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). However, not only the health or psychological consequences of psychological violence, but also its motivational aspects are increasingly coming to the fore (Salin, 2003a). Especially the concept of intrinsic motivation comes to the forefront at this point; because the individual’s sincere pursuit of work, feeling subjective satisfaction while taking responsibility for his/her work and having a constructive perspective on the act of work positively reflects on the success level of organizations (Quine, 2001).
Addressing the issue of psychological violence in the workplace cannot be limited to the perspective of “ensuring peace in the work environment”; it is known to closely affect many organizational factors such as corporate performance, brand value and employee loyalty (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996). In addition, competition in the working world, intense work pace and stress due to organizational structures can have long-term consequences on employees’ job satisfaction, especially by directly affecting motivation (Rayner, 1997). Accordingly, how sensitive the concept of intrinsic motivation is and how it is affected by psychological violence has become a subject of research (Kivimaki et al., 2003).
In the following sub-headings, the background of the research will be discussed and the theoretical and historical framework of the subject will be briefly examined. Then the purpose and importance of the research will be emphasized, the scope and limitations will be explained and finally the main hypotheses will be presented. All these stages will be explained using in-text references in APA style, guided by studies in the field.
1.1. BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH
With the transformation of the business world, globalization processes and increased economic competition, interactions within organizations have become more complex (Jackson & Ashley, 2005). While this complexity requires structural arrangements to increase productivity, it has also brought along many problems related to the psychological and social needs of employees (Einarsen, 2000). Psychological violence constitutes an important dimension of these problems, since behaviors such as pressure, harassment, humiliation or exclusion applied intentionally or systematically in the organization can damage employees’ self-esteem (Carnero & Martinez, 2007). Especially since the 1990s, studies on psychological violence in the workplace have shown that these acts have become an increasing problem in organizations (Leymann, 1996).
In the background, many factors that reinforce or trigger psychological violence can be listed. For example, communication problems within the organization, harsh discipline in the hierarchical structure or ambiguous job descriptions may pave the way for the emergence of psychological violence (Hoel, Cooper & Faragher, 2001). Some researchers define these factors as “organizational climate,” “leadership style,” ‘workload’ or ‘role conflict’ (Salin, 2003a). In addition to structural factors, personality conflicts between individuals and the inability of the individual to express himself/herself in the organization may also play a role in the formation of psychological violence (Rayner, Sheehan & Barker, 1999). Such behaviors can negatively affect the organizational climate by disturbing not only the targeted person but also other employees who are witnesses (Cortina, Magley, Williams & Langhout, 2001).
In the literature, it has been stated that psychological violence in the workplace can lead to burnout, low self-esteem, anxiety and depression at the individual level (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). In addition to these, it is emphasized that in the organizational context, results such as increased employee turnover, decrease in job quality, communication breakdown and loss of productivity may also occur (Field, 2008). In this context, some of the academic research has directly examined outcomes such as job performance and organizational commitment, while others have focused on psychosocial factors such as intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, morale or innovation potential (Kivimaki, Virtanen, Vartia, Elovainio, Vahtera & Keltikangas Jarvinen, 2003).
In particular, the concept of intrinsic motivation can be quickly affected by negative actions such as psychological violence, as it encompasses the enjoyment of the work itself, integration with one’s work and a sense of personal growth (Quine, 2001). At this point, a decrease in intrinsic motivation can also hinder creativity and innovation within the organization. Indeed, when an employee finds the workplace environment oppressive or unfair, he/she first starts to lose faith in the organizational culture, and over time, his/her enthusiasm and interest in his/her work diminishes (Lynn, 2008). This background has led researchers to examine in depth the direct and indirect interactions between psychological violence in the workplace and employees’ intrinsic motivation.
1.2. PURPOSE AND IMPORTANCE OF THE RESEARCH
The main purpose of this study is to examine how psychological violence in the workplace affects employees’ intrinsic motivation levels. From a theoretical perspective, the effects of psychological violence on employees’ organizational attitudes, job satisfaction and performance have been discussed in many studies (Einarsen, 1999). However, the extent to which intrinsic motivation is weakened in the face of psychological violence, under which organizational conditions it becomes more pronounced, or what organizational factors can mitigate this negative effect needs to be further elaborated (Rayner, 1997).
For example, factors such as employees’ perception of organizational support, fair wage policy or effective leadership styles may reduce the destructive power of psychological violence or contribute to the preservation of intrinsic motivation (Hoel et al., 2001). Therefore, another aim of this study is to shed light on strategies to maintain or strengthen intrinsic motivation in organizations where psychological violence is detected. Intrinsic motivation, which reflects the employee’s love, curiosity and energy for their work, is an important component of the long-term success of organizations (Zapf & Gross, 2001). Therefore, this study aims to provide valuable findings to both human resource management and organizational psychology literature in the context of the relationship between psychological violence and intrinsic motivation.
Another issue that emphasizes the importance of this issue is the tendency of people who are subjected to psychological violence in the workplace to disengage from their organizations (Kivimaki et al., 2000). Although this disengagement may be interpreted from the outside as simply quitting or poor performance, it can actually create a damage to the organizational culture that is difficult to repair. Therefore, organizations have to develop comprehensive policies to eliminate the phenomenon of psychological violence or at least mitigate its impact. These policies range from organizational training to regular feedback mechanisms (Notelaers, Einarsen, Witte & Vermunt, 2006). However, which strategy is more effective may vary according to the structure of the organizational culture, the understanding of leadership and the expectations of employees (Harting & Frosch, 2006).
Finally, the importance of the research is not only limited to bringing a new perspective to the academic literature; it also has a critical value in terms of raising the awareness of managers and employees about “psychological violence and intrinsic motivation” in corporate life. Because a well-defined and well-managed workplace atmosphere allows employees to reveal their intellectual capacity and creative aspects more effectively. Psychological violence in the workplace should be seen as an important barrier preventing this (Einarsen & Raknes, 1997).
1.3. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH
The research plans to examine the relationship between “psychological violence in the workplace” and “intrinsic motivation” from both conceptual and empirical perspectives. In particular, examples from different sectors such as service sector, manufacturing sector or public institutions will be examined; thus, a general framework will be presented. However, it should be noted that each organizational structure has its own dynamics (Lynn, 2008). Therefore, it is not always easy to address all sectors in a single study in an equally comprehensive manner.
In this context, one of the most important limitations of the study is the number of organizations or employee samples that can be reached during the data collection process (Salin, 2003b). As a matter of fact, many organizations may close their doors to researchers on this issue, fearing that allegations of psychological violence may reflect outside the organization (Field, 2008). This may limit the representativeness of the data obtained. In addition, it should not be forgotten that the phenomenon of psychological violence has a “perceptual” quality. Different individuals may perceive or interpret the same behavior in various ways. Therefore, personal perceptions may lead to different results in research findings (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996).
Another limitation may be related to the measurement of intrinsic motivation. Although scales and methods for measuring intrinsic motivation are common in the academic literature (e.g., questioning participants on dimensions such as job satisfaction, level of curiosity about work, or potential for self-actualization), the reliability of subjective statements in this process is always open to debate (Notelaers et al., 2005). Some participants may consciously or unconsciously underestimate the psychological violence they have experienced; others may use more exaggerated statements. Therefore, the results obtained from methods such as questionnaires, interviews or observations, although descriptive or explanatory, may not reflect the whole truth (McPhaul & Lipscomb, 2004).
On the other hand, another limitation of this study is that the research data is based on a specific time period. Psychological violence may be the product of a long-term process or it may be related to short-term conflicts (Leymann, 1992). Therefore, when the findings within the scope of the research reflect a specific period, they may be insufficient to explain long-term dynamics. In order to minimize all these limitations, a literature-based theoretical framework will be presented and data collection and analysis processes will be planned transparently (Schultz & Schultz, 1990). Thus, it is aimed to reach conclusions that may be enlightening for both employers and employees.
1.4. HYPOTHESES OF THE RESEARCH
In the literature, various links between psychological violence in the workplace and employee attitudes have been proposed (Einarsen, 1999). Since these connections may affect subjective experiences, especially intrinsic motivation, the following main assumptions are based on the hypothesis development process of the study:
(a) Direct Relationship between Psychological Violence and Intrinsic Motivation
The first hypothesis is that exposure to psychological violence in the workplace will significantly decrease the intrinsic motivation levels of employees. This is because it may become difficult for a person to be intrinsically motivated in an environment where he/she does not feel safe in the organization, is constantly under pressure or devalued (Leymann, 1996). Therefore, employees with high levels of perceived psychological violence are expected to lose a great deal of excitement and satisfaction towards their jobs (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002).
(b) The Link between Perceived Organizational Support and Intrinsic Motivation
Another hypothesis is that perceived support within the organization can reduce the negative effects of psychological violence. If the organization develops effective policies to protect the rights of employees, encourages open communication and offers sincere solutions to employees’ problems, the destructive power of psychological violence may be relatively reduced (Hoel et al., 2001). Therefore, organizational support is very important in maintaining intrinsic motivation. When an employee feels that the negative behaviors he/she experiences or witnesses are taken seriously by the management of the organization, it can alleviate the perception of psychological violence and contribute to the continuation of interest and enthusiasm for one’s own work (Salin, 2003a).
(c) The Link between Leadership Style and Psychological Violence
Psychological violence may not always be in the form of mistreatment directed by employees towards each other; sometimes, authoritarian or oppressive attitudes of managers can also feed these behaviors (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). Therefore, a third hypothesis is that leadership style will influence psychological violence behaviors, which in turn will shape intrinsic motivation. If the leader establishes an open communication channel with his/her employees and displays a more participative attitude, the likelihood of incidents of psychological violence may decrease. On the other hand, a leadership style that abuses authority or makes employees feel worthless all the time can degrade the organizational climate by reducing intrinsic motivation (Rayner et al., 1999).
(d) Relationship between Job Characteristics and Psychological Violence
The fourth hypothesis suggests that factors related to job structure may also affect the perception of psychological violence and intrinsic motivation (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996). In jobs that are routine, monotonous or do not allow for individual creativity, tension may rise more easily among employees. This tension may trigger behaviors that may create unfair competition or pressure within the organization. As a result, psychological violence may increase and intrinsic motivation may decrease (McPhaul & Lipscomb, 2004). On the other hand, if the work itself is enriching, innovative or stimulating to learning, employees’ intrinsic motivation levels may remain high and they may be more resistant to acts of psychological violence (Notelaers et al., 2006).
(e) Individual Differences and Resilience
Finally, the fifth hypothesis suggests that individuals’ personality traits and resilience levels may serve as a buffer against the devastating effects of psychological violence (Carnero & Martinez, 2007). While some individuals are more easily frustrated in challenging situations, others have the potential to regain their motivation by maintaining their self-esteem (Zapf & Gross, 2001). In this respect, one of two employees who experience similar levels of psychological violence in an organization may experience severe burnout, while the other may maintain intrinsic motivation with minimal damage. This difference also shows how much importance organizations attach to employee guidance, support and empowerment policies (Vartia, 2003).
The five hypotheses listed above were formulated to be tested throughout the research. Each hypothesis tries to explain the link between psychological violence in the workplace and intrinsic motivation by addressing the interaction of different variables. The findings to be obtained as a result of testing these hypotheses will contribute to both reviewing existing policies and developing new strategies for organizational managers (Einarsen & Raknes, 1997). At the same time, it can also shed light on employees’ making sense of their own experiences. Because sometimes individuals may look for the cause of the negativities they experience in the workplace in themselves and overlook the fact that the real problem stems from a deficiency in organizational processes (Leymann, 1992).
These hypotheses are designed as propositions that will provide a solid theoretical basis for future research. By testing these hypotheses, empirical studies can reveal in which sectors or organizational cultures the effect of psychological violence on intrinsic motivation is more pronounced. Thus, organizations can make more accurate decisions in areas such as human resources management, employee training and leadership strategies (Rayner, 1997).
- CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In order to properly analyze the relationship between psychological violence at the workplace and intrinsic motivation, both concepts need to be addressed in depth. In this section, both the definition and basic elements of psychological violence in the workplace (mobbing) and the place of intrinsic motivation in organizational psychology will be explained, and then the interaction of these two concepts will be discussed. Thus, the multidimensional structure of the subject will be made more understandable.
2.1. THE CONCEPT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE IN THE WORKPLACE (MOBBING)
2.1.1. Definition and Main Characteristics
Psychological violence in the workplace, also referred to as “mobbing” in various studies, generally refers to a systematic, deliberate and continuous set of negative behaviors (Einarsen, 1999). These negative behaviors may include actions such as humiliating, excluding, unfairly criticizing performance, verbally attacking or isolating the employee from social relations (Rayner, 1997). In the literature, it is frequently stated that the occurrence of psychological violence in an organization seriously damages the organizational climate and may leave permanent scars on the mental health of the victimized individual (Leymann, 1990).
The fact that the behaviors in question are carried out “continuously” and “deliberately” distinguishes the concept of mobbing from one-time offensive or aggressive actions (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996). For example, a single insult or criticism may not be directly considered within the scope of mobbing; however, if such acts are repeated in certain periods and systematically, psychological violence in the workplace may be in question (Carnero & Martinez, 2007). Therefore, whether the tension in the work environment is a temporary conflict or a targeted attack is very important for the detection of psychological violence (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002).
The reporting of such behaviors by employees is closely related to the transparency and open communication of the organizational culture (Hoel, Cooper & Faragher, 2001). In some organizational structures, employees may hesitate to report psychological violence to senior management or human resources units. Factors such as fear of dismissal, stigmatization, or the belief that management will be insensitive are behind this (Field, 2008). This culture of silence may pave the way for the insidious spread of psychological violence. Indeed, the absence or ineffectiveness of sanction mechanisms in organizations makes it easier for the perpetrator to continue his/her behaviors (Salin, 2003a).
2.1.2. Types and Sources of Psychological Violence
In the literature, types of psychological violence are generally classified under two main categories: direct aggressive behaviors (e.g., insults, threats, humiliation) and indirect aggressive behaviors (e.g., gossip, exclusion, ignoring) (Zapf & Gross, 2001). While direct aggression aims to openly offend or intimidate the targeted person, indirect aggression often involves more covert and manipulative methods. Both types are corrosive for the victim and can damage self-esteem in the long run (Quine, 2001).
When the sources of psychological violence are examined, power imbalances within the organization often come to the fore (Leymann, 1996). The oppressive attitude of a senior manager towards his/her subordinates, animosity arising from competition among colleagues, or passive-aggressive behaviors of lower-level employees towards their superiors can manifest in different ways (Harting & Frosch, 2006). From time to time, uncertainty or mismanagement of business processes in organizations can also cause these behaviors to become widespread. Particularly in organizations undergoing rapid change, uncertainty breeds anxiety; anxiety can trigger hostile attitudes by activating the employee’s defense mechanisms, sometimes manifesting as psychological violence (Rayner, Sheehan & Barker, 1999).
According to another perspective, bureaucratic and hierarchical barriers in the organizational structure limit the opportunity for employees to express themselves, leading to blockage of communication channels (Einarsen & Raknes, 1997). This, in turn, magnifies conflicts within the organization and often leaves them unresolved. In this process, unsuccessful managerial interventions or ignored complaints may cause psychological violence to become a chronic problem (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). In the long run, a built-in “silent approval” prevails in the organizational culture and the victim becomes a lone actor who cannot find an institutional remedy for his/her problems (Einarsen, 2000).
2.1.3. Consequences of Psychological Violence
Research on psychological violence reveals that these behaviors have negative psychological, physiological and social effects on the victim (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). Consequences such as depression, anxiety disorder, loss of self-confidence, sleep problems and even an increased tendency to develop chronic diseases, which put the mental health of the individual at risk, are frequently emphasized in the literature (Kivimaki, Elovainio & Vahtera, 2000). These problems caused by psychological violence can greatly reduce the employee’s productivity and desire for work. As a matter of fact, long-term mobbing cases increase the intention to leave the organization and may trigger turnover rates (Zapf, Einarsen, Hoel & Vartia, 2003).
On the other hand, it has been reported that not only the victimized individual, but also other employees who witness psychological violence have decreased job satisfaction (Rayner, 1997). This may weaken collective motivation by fostering an environment of fear and insecurity within the organization. This negative workplace climate erodes organizational culture and may even damage the employer brand of the organization (Notelaers, Einarsen, Witte & Vermunt, 2006). As a result, psychological violence brings with it significant individual and organizational costs. From a financial point of view, many expenses such as decreased productivity, increased health expenditures, legal processes and loss of reputation can be reflected as a heavy burden on businesses (EUROFOUND, 2007).
2.1.4. Organizational Culture and Prevention Strategies
Organizational culture is a key variable in preventing or reducing psychological violence. Organizations that adopt open communication, respectful interaction and fair performance evaluation systems tend to have a low prevalence of psychological violence (Hoel et al., 2001). Organizational trainings and consultancy services can also be considered as preventive measures. For example, by raising managers’ awareness on this issue, negative behaviors that employees are exposed to can be detected early (ILO, 1998). It is also a noteworthy step to include clear provisions on combating psychological violence in organizational policy documents, disciplinary regulations and employee handbooks (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006).
Another important element is effective grievance mechanisms. It is essential that employees are provided with platforms where they can safely report negative behaviors they experience or observe (Field, 2008). The fact that these mechanisms are independent, reliable and produce quick solutions brings moral support in terms of showing that the victim of violence is not alone (Lynn, 2008). Thus, a culture of dialogue can be built within the organization where each individual can share their experiences, instead of an atmosphere in which problems are not voiced, which is described as a “spiral of silence” (Rayner et al., 1999).
All these prevention strategies require a decisive attitude from the organizational management. If the top management does not recognize psychological violence as an organizational problem and does not develop sanctions against it, the impact of grassroots efforts may be limited (Vartia, 2003). As a result, the prevention of psychological violence in the workplace is possible through a holistic approach to organizational norms, communication styles and management approach (Jackson & Ashley, 2005). Because this phenomenon is shaped by the interaction of various variables ranging from power asymmetries in organizational relations to leadership styles and personal characteristics (Leymann, 1996).
2.2. INTRINSIC MOTIVATION CONCEPT
2.2.1. Theoretical Background and Definition
Intrinsic motivation is defined as the individual’s enjoyment of doing the work, seeking self-improvement and attaching meaning to the work rather than an external compulsion or reward (Schultz & Schultz, 1990). This definition points to the energy source that lies deep within human behavior. Through intrinsic motivation, a person can approach his/her work with love, self-actualization and “willingness to learn” (Rayner, 1997). Therefore, in the presence of intrinsic motivation, individuals voluntarily undertake their tasks and feel a higher sense of satisfaction (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996).
In the organizational psychology literature, three main elements are important in the development of intrinsic motivation: autonomy, competence and sense of belonging (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). Of these, autonomy means having a say over one’s work processes, determining one’s own working methods and expressing one’s creativity (Salin, 2003a). Efficacy refers to self-confidence in one’s work and satisfaction with one’s performance. Belongingness, on the other hand, represents identification with the organization, establishing positive relationships with colleagues and striving for a common goal (Zapf & Gross, 2001).
2.2.2. Organizational Importance of Intrinsic Motivation
Intrinsically motivated employees are generally individuals with high levels of job satisfaction and commitment (Kivimaki et al., 2003). This has critical implications for the productivity and competitiveness of organizations because highly motivated employees may be more willing to adopt innovative ideas and generate solutions to organizational problems (Einarsen, 2000). Moreover, employees with high intrinsic motivation remain engaged in work processes without being overly dependent on extrinsic rewards or punishments. In other words, they derive satisfaction from the act of “doing work” itself, rather than working only for the expectation of salary or promotion (Quine, 2001).
In addition, high intrinsic motivation contributes positively to organizational culture. Employees with strong motivation increase information sharing with their colleagues, support team spirit and increase the sense of solidarity within the organization (Rayner, 1997). This can facilitate the constructive resolution of conflicts in the workplace. It can also shorten the time to achieve the mission and vision goals of organizations as it increases work performance (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). On the other hand, since it supports psychological well-being, it reduces the likelihood of the employee experiencing burnout syndrome (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002).
2.2.3. Factors Affecting Intrinsic Motivation
In the literature, it is stated that intrinsic motivation is influenced by many organizational and individual factors (McPhaul & Lipscomb, 2004). Organizational culture, leadership style, job quality, career development opportunities and feedback mechanisms play an important role in shaping intrinsic motivation (Harting & Frosch, 2006). For example, employees having a sense of autonomy towards work, participating in decisions, being appreciated for their efforts and being offered development opportunities are factors that increase intrinsic motivation (Notelaers et al., 2006).
At the individual level, factors such as personality structure, value judgments, openness to learning and development, and level of self-confidence come to the fore (Salin, 2003b). While some people want to learn and work with an innate sense of curiosity, others may be inclined to act with more extrinsic motives (Schultz & Schultz, 1990). At this point, motivational strategies of organizational management should be planned in a way to ensure the harmony between individual characteristics and job requirements. Otherwise, the expected positive effect on intrinsic motivation may not be fully realized (Einarsen & Raknes, 1997).
2.2.4. Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Intrinsic Motivation
The existence of a strong correlation between intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction has been documented in many studies (Rayner et al., 1999). An employee who exhibits a high level of intrinsic motivation also increases his/her job satisfaction level. Because when an individual finds his/her work meaningful and performs this work on his/her own initiative, he/she achieves psychological satisfaction with a sense of achievement (Zapf & Gross, 2001). This satisfaction also positively affects the interactions of employees in the context of the organization. They communicate better with their colleagues, take a more active role in team projects and become willing to bring creative solutions to problems (Quine, 2001).
In contrast, when destructive factors such as psychological violence come into play, employees’ positive feelings towards work can be shaken (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). Intrinsic motivation starts to weaken, especially when feelings of autonomy and competence are damaged. When hostile attitudes in the workplace limit one’s opportunities for self-expression or put one in a constant defensive position, the feeling of “self-actualization” can quickly disappear (Rayner, 1997). In such a situation, the employee’s organizational commitment decreases and job satisfaction declines, leading to a loss of performance (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996).
2.3. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE IN THE WORKPLACE AND INTRINSIC MOTIVATION
2.3.1. Dynamic Interaction and Theoretical Approach
The relationship between psychological violence in the workplace and intrinsic motivation has become a comprehensive area of investigation in the organizational behavior literature (Kivimaki et al., 2003). The basis of this interaction is based on the damage to the employee’s perceptions of “autonomy” and “competence” in the organization as a result of psychological violence. A person who is systematically pressured or made to feel worthless may lose his/her work motivation to a great extent. In other words, the individual may stop enjoying “the work itself” and start to think that he/she “has to do this job” (Einarsen, 1999).
The organizational culture in which psychological violence exists creates an atmosphere that undermines feelings of “autonomy” and “belonging” (Leymann, 1996). Especially when the victimized employee does not receive the support he/she expects from his/her colleagues or managers, he/she may experience a sense of alienation from the organizational structure (Salin, 2003a). This situation greatly weakens the sense of “belonging to work”, which is an important dimension of intrinsic motivation. Thus, the individual acts only with a “sense of duty”, and the moral satisfaction he/she derives from work decreases rapidly (Harting & Frosch, 2006).
In the literature, it is emphasized that this process has negative reflections on organizational performance, especially in the long run (Rayner, 1997). Since employees are in a constant state of “insecurity”, they are afraid of making mistakes, do not want to take risks and hesitate to share innovative ideas. At the same time, psychological violence undermines the spirit of collaboration by creating a fear of “what if something similar happens to me?” in employees other than the victim (Field, 2008). This chain effect can lead to a collective decrease in intrinsic motivation and the creation of an unproductive and fearful atmosphere (Einarsen, 2000).
2.3.2. Mechanisms of Psychological Violence on Intrinsic Motivation
Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain how psychological violence in the workplace negatively affects intrinsic motivation. In order to understand these mechanisms more clearly, it is possible to examine them under several headings:
- Devaluation and Loss of Self-confidence
The employee who is subjected to psychological violence may be questioned about his/her professional competencies or may be subjected to humiliating expressions (Carnero & Martinez, 2007). Such behaviors damage the individual’s self-confidence and undermine the perception of “competence”. If a person is constantly exposed to unfair criticism despite his/her efforts to do his/her job in the best way, he/she may lose faith in his/her own potential for success after a while (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). This damages the dimension of “understanding work and self-actualization”, which is one of the cornerstones of intrinsic motivation.
- Social Isolation and Loss of Belonging
Psychological violence often goes hand in hand with the person being cut off from organizational communication networks. The victim is not informed about important meetings, is not invited to social events or is actively excluded (Rayner, 1997). This isolation weakens the sense of “belonging” and prevents the person from seeing themselves as part of the organizational community (Hoel et al., 2001). Losing a sense of belonging to a community is directly related to a decrease in intrinsic motivation, as people naturally want to be accepted and respected in the environment in which they work (Kivimaki et al., 2000).
- Constant Worry and Stress
The victim of mobbing lives with the worry that he/she will be attacked again at any moment. This chronic stress makes it difficult for the employee to concentrate easily and maintain enthusiasm for work (Leymann, 1992). Tasks that require creativity, concentration and determination cannot be performed optimally under high stress (Zapf & Gross, 2001). Therefore, after a while, a person may tend to complete only the minimum level of tasks. This leads to a complete “downsizing” of intrinsic motivation (Vartia, 2003).
- Lack of Internal Support
When the employee cannot find the necessary organizational support in an environment where they experience psychological violence, they are forced to accept the existence of an unfair system (Field, 2008). In some cases, managers or human resources departments may even treat such complaints as “exaggerated” or “just the nature of the job” (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). This insensitivity virtually nullifies the feeling of “trust in the organization” that feeds intrinsic motivation. Thus, even if the individual wants to fulfill his/her job responsibilities, he/she may lose motivation by thinking that the organization does not value him/her (Notelaers et al., 2006).
2.3.3. Protective Factors at Individual and Organizational Level
Although the negative effects of psychological violence in the workplace are evident, the presence of some protective factors can help employees maintain their intrinsic motivation to some extent. These factors can be examined at both individual and organizational levels.
- Individual Resilience
- Some employees, because of their high levels of personal resilience, may be less damaged when they face mobbing-like situations (Carnero & Martinez, 2007). For example, factors such as having a strong social support, having friendship and family ties to receive external help, and having access to professional support mechanisms can partially alleviate the devastating effects of psychological violence (Lynn, 2008). By maintaining his/her self-efficacy perception, the individual can manage to keep his/her intrinsic motivation alive despite the injustices he/she is exposed to in the organization.
- Participative and Supportive Leadership
- One of the most important protective factors in terms of organizational culture is the adoption of a participatory and people-oriented leadership approach (Harting & Frosch, 2006). The spread of psychological violence can be prevented when the leader takes the problems experienced by employees seriously and tries to find solutions. In such an environment, employees feel safe and can maintain their enthusiasm for their work (Hoel et al., 2001). In particular, practices such as open-door policies, regular feedback sessions and “common sense” meetings contribute to a healthy organizational climate (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006).
- Fair Performance Appraisal and Feedback
- Fair and transparent performance appraisal systems can reduce the dimension of “unfair criticism”, which is an important trigger of psychological violence (Salin, 2003b). When the employee knows that his/her performance is evaluated according to objective criteria, he/she more easily maintains a sense of self-efficacy in his/her job. This, in turn, reinforces the feeling of “self-confidence” that is necessary for the maintenance of intrinsic motivation (Kivimaki et al., 2003). If the organization can build feedback processes in a regular and positive way, employees can make progress by accurately perceiving their areas of development.
- Organizational Support and Counseling Mechanisms
- Organizational support systems are also critical in combating psychological violence at work (ILO, 2000). For example, regular meetings with expert psychologists or coaches, stress management training, teamwork workshops and similar activities can help individuals maintain their intrinsic motivation levels (McPhaul & Lipscomb, 2004). The presence of these services gives the employee the message that “my organization values me” and makes them feel that they are not alone in the face of challenging experiences (Zapf & Gross, 2001).
2.3.4. Findings from Academic Research and Personal Evaluation
In the literature, there are numerous findings showing that employees who experience psychological violence experience a significant decrease in their intrinsic motivation levels (Rayner, 1997). Some studies even reveal that the negative relationship between these two variables is quite high (Einarsen, 2000). Generally, as the level of psychological violence increases, one’s intrinsic interest, commitment and passion for work decline in parallel (Leymann, 1992).
As a personal comment, understanding the psychological mechanisms behind these results is instructive in shaping the human resource management strategies of organizations. Employees who have a high sense of belonging to an organization and enjoy their work normally continue to make positive contributions for many years in a healthy organizational climate (Zapf & Gross, 2001). However, when psychological violence comes into play, the individual is likely to disengage from the workplace or put his/her potential on the back burner (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). Therefore, leadership styles, organizational policy development processes and strengthening organizational culture seem to be indispensable for keeping intrinsic motivation alive (Kivimaki et al., 2003).
In particular, the dissemination of trainings focused on stress management, communication skills and empathy in organizations can prevent psychological violence by increasing conflict resolution capabilities (Harting & Frosch, 2006). In addition, the sense of organizational justice is reinforced by the fact that the management staff, acting with a sense of corporate responsibility, seriously evaluates the cases of violence and takes necessary disciplinary actions (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). Such a perception of justice strengthens employees’ trust in the organization and enables them to maintain their intrinsic motivation levels (Notelaers et al., 2006).
Nevertheless, despite all these measures, there may be situations where psychological violence cannot be completely eliminated. What is important is for the organization to create spaces where the victim can be heard by operating deterrent mechanisms against negative behaviors (Field, 2008). Because in most mobbing cases, it is seen that the victim withdraws into his/her own shell, remains timid and avoids even asking for help (Salin, 2003a). In this context, in organizations with an active participatory culture, problems can be taken under control before they have the opportunity to spread.
2.3.5. Protecting and Strengthening Intrinsic Motivation
Despite the negative interaction between psychological violence and intrinsic motivation, it is possible to maintain or rebuild employee motivation levels if organizations develop proactive approaches (Kivimaki et al., 2000). These include leaders and managers meeting with employees at regular intervals, encouraging practices that enrich the structure of work, and providing employees with access to professional development opportunities (Hoel et al., 2001). It is also important to align the factors that support intrinsic motivation (autonomy, competence, belonging, meaningful work) with organizational strategies (Rayner et al., 1999).
The “desire to learn” and the feeling of “being able to express oneself at work” play a major role in an employee’s intrinsic orientation towards work (Schultz & Schultz, 1990). Therefore, managers’ giving employees the chance to learn through trial and error, adopting a tolerant approach towards mistakes and supporting new ideas are critical factors that nurture intrinsic motivation (McPhaul & Lipscomb, 2004). When such an approach is not adopted, people avoid taking risks and their job satisfaction gradually decreases (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002).
In addition, it is clear that only material incentives will not be sufficient when designing reward systems that can increase intrinsic motivation in organizations (Rayner, 1997). “Intangible” elements such as recognizing and appreciating an employee’s achievements, providing him/her with opportunities for professional growth and a transparent career path are also important (Zapf & Gross, 2001). The fact that an employee is “valued by the organization” may have a more lasting effect on maintaining and improving intrinsic motivation than extrinsic rewards (Jackson & Ashley, 2005).
2.3.6. Consequences for Organizational Performance and Corporate Reputation
The relationship between workplace psychological violence and intrinsic motivation is also closely related to macro indicators such as organizational performance, corporate reputation and employee turnover (Einarsen & Raknes, 1997). Indeed, the contributions of highly motivated employees to innovation and organizational development can provide significant advantages to companies in a competitive market (Harting & Frosch, 2006). In organizations where psychological violence is prevalent, on the other hand, there is a constant atmosphere of tension, which causes employees to spend their energy on conflict and anxiety (Carnero & Martinez, 2007).
In addition, employee experiences are quite decisive in the external perception of organizational reputation. Negative experiences of individuals who have been victims of mobbing or witnessed such a situation can damage the employer brand of the organization (Field, 2008). This may put the organization at a disadvantage in attracting qualified labor. Intrinsically motivated and talented candidates will prefer organizations that have a strong reputation and prioritize employee welfare (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). Therefore, it is seen that discussions on psychological violence should be addressed not only in terms of individual victimization but also in terms of the sustainability of organizations (Vartia, 2003).
2.3.7. Solution Suggestions and Future Perspectives
It is important for future research to focus more on variables that play a mediating or moderating role in the interaction between psychological violence and intrinsic motivation (Salin, 2003b). For example, factors such as perceptions of organizational trust and support, ethical leadership, and psychosocial risk management have the potential to explain this interaction (Notelaers et al., 2005). At the same time, comparative research with samples from different countries and cultures can facilitate our understanding of cultural codes on mobbing (Einarsen, 2000). Cultural attitudes largely determine which behaviors are perceived as “normal” or “noteworthy”.
In this context, organizations’ human resources policies can be integrated with training and development programs to develop practices that protect both employee welfare and intrinsic motivation (ILO, 2000). In today’s world where digitalization is accelerating, the relationship between remote or hybrid working models and psychological violence can also be investigated. Situations such as lack of communication, misunderstandings or cyberbullying on online platforms can take the concept of mobbing to a new dimension (Kingma, 2001). Therefore, new study models and policy designs to be developed in this field may reveal original findings linking intrinsic motivation and psychological violence (Jelic, Stoini & Bunikic, 2005).
Research that deeply examines the link between psychological violence in the workplace and intrinsic motivation offers meaningful outcomes in terms of improving the organizational climate, supporting employees’ personal and professional development, protecting corporate reputation and many other aspects (McPhaul & Lipscomb, 2004). Managers’ awareness of this issue is a critical step that will secure not only a certain sustained “occupational health and safety” perspective, but also the holistic success of the organization in the long run (Schultz & Schultz, 1990).
The fact that psychological violence in the workplace and intrinsic motivation are closely related has remarkable implications for organizational management and employee well-being. Mobbing can consistently undermine intrinsic motivation by undermining employees’ perceptions of autonomy, belonging and competence (Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996). This process wreaks havoc on a wide range of issues, from job performance to daily psychological health (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). On the other hand, conscious attitudes and policies of organizations, leaders’ empathy and participatory management approach, open communication channels and employee-friendly practices are effective in both regressing psychological violence and rebuilding intrinsic motivation (Kivimaki et al., 2003).
Decreased intrinsic motivation can have a series of negative repercussions, ranging from organizational performance to social welfare (Rayner, 1997). Therefore, taking psychological violence in the workplace seriously and creating a climate that supports employees’ intrinsic motivation is not only a moral imperative but also a strategic step towards organizational productivity and sustainability (Zapf & Gross, 2001). Addressing a complex phenomenon such as mobbing through the holistic coordination of training, policy development, leadership understanding and organizational culture will contribute to the creation of healthier and more successful work environments in the future (Salin, 2003a).
In this context, all organizational stakeholders have a role to play. Top management should establish objective review mechanisms that can respond quickly to allegations of violence and harassment (Chappell & Di Martino, 2006). Human resources departments should organize awareness-raising activities among both managers and employees through training and consultancy services, and develop protective policies to defend the rights of individuals who have been victimized (Field, 2008). Managers should review their leadership styles and provide a framework that is sensitive to employees’ needs for autonomy, development and participation (Hoel et al., 2001). Employees, on the other hand, should strive to develop their professional resilience skills and should not hesitate to resort to organizational support channels when necessary (Carnero & Martinez, 2007).
When this multifaceted approach is adopted, it is clear that significant progress can be made in minimizing psychological violence in the workplace and protecting intrinsic motivation (Vartia, 2003). When people are trusted, respected and appreciated in their work environment, they have the chance to reveal their potential and creativity at a higher level (Schultz & Schultz, 1990). Such a climate not only increases the profitability of businesses, but also brings happier, self-developed and job-satisfied individuals into society (Mikkelsen & Einarsen, 2002). Therefore, organizations that are free from psychological violence, where intrinsic motivation is supported and employees are valued will be among the most successful organizations both today and in the future (Rayner et al., 1999).
3.METHOD
3.1. Research Model and Hypothesis(es)
3.2. Population and Sample
3.3. Data Collection Process
3.4.Scales Used
3.5. Data Analysis
4.FİNDİNGS
4.1. Demographic Information
4.2. Findings Related to Hypotheses
4.3. Discussion and Evaluation
5.DİSCUSSİON, CONCLUSİON AND RECOMMENDATİONS
- Summary of Results
- Recommendations in Practice
- Suggestions for Future Research
References
Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Hjelt-Back, M. (1994). Aggression among university employees. Aggressive Behavior, 20(3), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:3<173::AID-AB2480200304>3.0.CO;2-D
Carnero, M. A., & Martinez, B. (2007). Economic and health consequences of the initial stage of mobbing: The Spanish case. http://www.webmeets.com/files/papers/SAE/2005/104/CM05_june05.pdf
Chappell, D., & Di Martino, V. (2006). Violence at work (3rd ed.). International Labour Organization.
Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.6.1.64
Davenport, N., Schwartz, R. D., & Elliott, G. P. (2003). Mobbing: İşyerinde duygusal taciz (O. C. Önertoy, Çev.). Sistem Yayıncılık. (Orijinal eser İngilizce yayımlanmıştır: Mobbing: Emotional abuse in the American workplace.)
Di Martino, V. (2002). Workplace violence in the health sector: Country case studies (Brazil, Bulgaria, Lebanon, Portugal, South Africa, Thailand, and an additional Australian study) Synthesis report. ILO/ICN/WHO/PSI.
Di Martino, V. (2003). Relationship between work stress and workplace violence in the health sector. ILO/ICN/WHO/PSI.
EASHW. (2002). Bullying at work (Fact Sheet No. 23). European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. https://osha.europa.eu/
Einarsen, S. (1999). The nature and causes of bullying at work. International Journal of Manpower, 20(1/2), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437729910268588
Einarsen, S. (2000). Harassment and bullying at work: A review of the Scandinavian approach. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4), 379–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(98)00043-3
Einarsen, S., & Raknes, B. I. (1997). Harassment at work and the victimization of men. Violence and Victims, 12(3), 247–263.
Einarsen, S., & Skogstad, A. (1996). Bullying at work: Epidemiological findings in public and private organizations. European Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594329608414854
EUROFOUND. (2007). Quality report of the 4th European working conditions survey. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
Field, T. (2008). Bullying in a public sector organisation being privatised.
http://www.bullyonline.org/personal.htm
Harting, K., & Frosch, J. (2006, April). Workplace mobbing syndrome: The “silent and unseen” occupational hazard. National Conference on Women and Industrial Relations, Griffith University, Brisbane.
Hoel, H., Cooper, C. L., & Faragher, B. (2001). The experience of bullying in Great Britain: The impact of organizational status. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 443–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320143000780
ILO. (1998). When working becomes hazardous. World of Work, 26, 3–4.
ILO. (2000). Violence at work. EUROFOUND. http://www.ilo.org
Jackson, M., & Ashley, D. (2005). Physical and psychological violence in Jamaica’s health sector. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública, 18(2), 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1020-49892005000700005
Jelic, Z. J., Stoini, E., & Bunikic, S. C. (2005). The effect of mobbing on medical staff performance. Acta Clinica Croatica, 44(4), 347–352.
Kingma, M. (2001). Workplace violence in the health sector: A problem of epidemic proportion. International Nursing Review, 48(3), 129–130. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-7657.2001.00097.x
Kivimaki, M., Elovainio, M., & Vahtera, J. (2000). Workplace bullying and sickness absence in hospital staff. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 57(10), 656–660. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.57.10.656
Kivimaki, M., Virtanen, M., Vartia, M., Elovainio, M., Vahtera, J., & Keltikangas Jarvinen, L. (2003). Workplace bullying and the risk of cardiovascular disease and depression. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 60(10), 779–783. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.60.10.779
Leymann, H. (1990). Mobbing and psychological terror at workplaces. Violence and Victims, 5(2), 119–126.
Leymann, H. (1992). The mobbing encyclopaedia. http://www.leymann.se/English/13100E.HTM
Leymann, H. (1996). The context and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594329608414853
Lynn, J. F. (2008). Workplace bullying—Aggressive behavior and its effect on job satisfaction and productivity (Doctoral dissertation). University of Phoenix.
McPhaul, K. M., & Lipscomb, J. A. (2004). Workplace violence in health care: Recognized but not regulated. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.3912/OJIN.Vol9No03Man06
Mikkelsen, E. G., & Einarsen, S. (2002). Basic assumptions and symptoms of post-traumatic stress among victims of bullying at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11(1), 87–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320143000861
Notelaers, G., Einarsen, S., Witte, H., & Vermunt, J. K. (2005). Estimating the prevalence of bullying at work: A latent class cluster approach. http://spitswww.uvt.nl/~vermunt/notelaers2005.pdf
Notelaers, G., Einarsen, S., Witte, H., & Vermunt, J. K. (2006). Measuring exposure to bullying at work: The validity and advantages of the latent class cluster approach. Work & Stress, 20(4), 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370601071594+
Quine, L. (2001). Workplace bullying in nurses. Journal of Health Psychology, 6(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910530100600106
Rayner, C. (1997). The incidence of workplace bullying. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 7(3), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(199706)7:3<199::AID-CASP418>3.0.CO;2-H
Rayner, C., Sheehan, M., & Barker, M. (1999). Theoretical approaches to the study of bullying at work. International Journal of Manpower, 20(1/2), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437729910268468
Salin, D. (2003a). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56(10), 1213–1232. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267035610003
Salin, D. (2003b). Workplace bullying among business professionals: Prevalence, organisational antecedents and gender differences (Doctoral dissertation). Helsinki School of Economics.
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (1990). Psychology and industry today: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. Macmillan.
Steinman, S. (2003). Workplace violence in the health sector: Country case—South Africa. In Joint Programme on Workplace Violence in the Health Sector (ILO/ICN/WHO/PSI), International Labour Organization, Geneva.
Vartia, M. (2003). Workplace bullying: A study on the work environment, well-being and health. People and Work Research Reports, 56. Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.
Zapf, D., & Gross, C. (2001). Conflict escalation and coping with workplace bullying: A replication and extension. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 497–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320143000834
Zapf, D., Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., & Vartia, M. (2003). Empirical findings on bullying in the workplace. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: International perspectives in research and practice (pp. 103–126).
