campusreview . com . au policy & reform right across different sectors , the same underlying ingredients are there . Those ways of managing and coordinating people and tasks can show up in slightly different ways , but we see the same regular building blocks .
You developed a screening tool that identifies the major risk areas for workplace bullying . How does that work ? We ’ ve designed , tested and refined a risk audit tool to measure those different domains mentioned above . We can get a leading indicator of where the risk of bullying lies by measuring how working hours are coordinated and administrated ; those practices used to manage performance as well as shaping the relationships and the work environments .
We have a really rigorous test of these things , and they show us where the greater risk of bullying lies and where we should direct our attention if we want to make changes to prevent bullying .
What changes could be made at the university level to improve management and reduce that risk of bullying ? It ’ s pretty common for universities to have some bullying mechanisms in place . That might take the form of a policy or a code of conduct which talks about the sort of behaviour that ’ s expected of employees and says what bullying is , and what to do if someone is being bullied .
There ’ s typically some kind of antibullying training where staff need to learn about what bullying is with the hope that it ’ ll prevent that . If people are then feeling like they ’ re bullied , they ’ re meant to make a complaint and report it for investigation . It ’ s really important that we do have these mechanisms because they set the safety signal – bullying is something we care about . But the problem with these mechanisms is that they all focus on bullying behaviour .
It ’ s just not enough . It ’ s putting all of the emphasis on individual staff who are working in a pretty high pressure system at the moment to behave nicely , and it ’ s overlooking those underlying causes in the organisational system .
We know from my own research , but also from other research internationally , that this is where the biggest gap lies . What I ’ d really like to see in the higher education sector is that we actually do a proper risk management process for bullying that identifies what the risk factors are , and puts in place risk control measures in a proactive way .
Organisations , including universities , manage risk on a day to day basis and they have risk management plans . We need to have a proper risk management process for bullying and a proper risk management plan for it at work as well that tackles those underlying root causes .
How can universities tackle those root causes ? Safe Work Australia has some good supporting information around this . They outline the four stage risk management process , identify the nature and level of risk and the underlying risk factors , then design those risk control measures , implement and monitor them , review them and change them .
Universities need to use a risk order tool like the one that ’ s been developed in our research , or they need to draw on some resources from Safe Work Australia in order to guide them in carrying out that risk management .
That ’ s what ’ s not being done at the moment , and that ’ s the missing ingredient to start with . They can follow their regular risk management processes like they do for other work health and safety hazards . They can apply that to bullying as a psychosocial hazard , and they can carry it out .
What are the risks for universities and the sector generally if they don ’ t manage workplace bullying better ? All organisations , including universities , have a duty of care to provide a safe place of work . There ’ s actually a legal obligation to do this kind of risk assessment , and that ’ s only being strengthened by a model code of practice introduced by Safe Work Australia providing more weight behind the need to do this kind of proactive risk management .
I know in Victoria that ’ s going to go even further as there ’ s going to be specific psychosocial risk guidelines introduced . There ’ s more and more direct obligation for workplaces to have this kind of effective risk management in place , so it ’ s actually a risk now for universities if they don ’ t do this .
In terms of how it affects university functioning though , that ’ s a really important issue in and of itself . Some of my research shows that bullying affects
We need to have a proper risk management process for bullying .
people ’ s working memory and attention span . So there ’ s a direct connection between being exposed to bullying and the degree to which we can do jobs that require our intellectual input .
There could be the potential for a severe undermining of the work that we do in universities if we don ’ t tackle bullying . Then there ’ s all the health effects on staff that I ’ ve mentioned . There ’ s the effect of having conflicts in the workplace and what that does to undermine performance , and so there ’ s a cascade of potential negative implications if we don ’ t actually get right down to these underlying root causes .
Other things that universities can consider include monitoring bullying and harassment levels as well as the quality of working conditions , so that they have good up to date information about what ’ s going on for their workforce .
They can think about having performance appraisals and promotion mechanisms , recruitment and selection mechanisms that actually focus on people ’ s behaviour , on core values . Not just the outcomes that are achieved , but the way we go about getting to those outcomes too .
In bullying complaints processes , often the focus is on proving whether or not bullying happened , but actually we could use the information that comes from complaints to help work out what the root causes are , what the underlying problems are in that particular university or in an area of the university and really approach them as an organisational problem rather than just on an individual complaint basis .
One final thing I think that ’ s really important is to have mechanisms in place for university staff to raise issues like bullying or stress that affect their mental health and wellbeing at work , and to be involved in resolving them in a really positive way . That ’ s a ground-up mechanism to start to make the changes needed for a healthy work environment where bullying doesn ’ t have a chance to flourish . ■
11