Aggression in Organizations

Violence, Abuse, and Harassment at Work and in Schools

Mark Braverman

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780789028419
• eBook ISBN: 9781136438158
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

Learn guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and intervention!

As violence and abusiveness become increasingly prevalent in our schools and workplaces, our sense of safety suffers a heavy toll. Aggression in Organizations: Violence, Abuse, and Harassment at Work and in Schools presents a wide range of research, perspectives, and approaches to violence and abuse at work and in school. Respected authorities discuss practical strategies that foster a sense of safety, dignity, growth, creativity, and social support in every organization.

Topics include:

• the quantitative and qualitative methods that document the long-term effects of trauma and the effectiveness of interventions
  
• the role of perceptions in gauging workplace hostility
  
• a personality test to identify an aggressive personality
  
• the role of organizational frustration in forming aggressive behaviors
  
• the effects of a teacher's emotional abuse of a student
  
• two forms of workplace abuse, bullying and mobbing
  
• and many more!
  
  

Aggression in Organizations discusses in depth the effects of physical violence, sexual and emotional abuse, and bullying in various situations and institutions. Case studies illustrate examples that bring the latest empirical and applied research into clear focus. Insights are revealed into what can be done to prevent a future filled with violence as well as guidelines for treating people affected by aggressive acts. Each chapter is well-referenced and many include helpful diagrams and tables to enhance clarity.

Aggression in Organizations presents and explains:

• an overview of workplace and school violence protection
  
• a ten year clinical case study of an incident of workplace violence
  
• factors influencing women's perceptions of a sexually hostile workplace
  
• the emotionally abusive workplace
  
• identifying the aggressive personality
  
• organizational frustration and aggressive behaviors
  
• creating respectful, productive workplaces
  
• emotional abuse in the classroom
  
• adult-student sexual harassment
  
• a qualitative analysis of students and parents' immediate reactions to the shootings at Columbine High School
  
• a school-wide bullying prevention program for elementary students
  
  

Aggression in Organizations is essential reading for psychologists, educators, organizational consultants, human resource professionals, school counselors, and social workers.

AGGRESSION, ABUSE, AND HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE

A 10-Year Clinical Case Study to an Incident of Workplace Violence

Angelea Panos
Patrick Panos
Patty Dulle

SUMMARY. This study evaluated the effects of an incident of workplace violence on a group of employees over a 10-year period of time. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to document the long-term effects of the trauma and the effectiveness of interventions provided. Results indicated that some employees suffered from long-term symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Many interventions were rated as helpful by employees; however, a small but significant subgroup of employees found debriefings and initial family support groups to be unhelpful. Other prolonged effects of the trauma included all pregnant employees suffering miscarriages, long-term loss of interest in sexual intimacy, and long-term triggers or reactions to reminders of the trauma. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

KEYWORDS. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, workplace violence, longitudinal research, treatment outcome

Workplace violence is increasingly becoming recognized as a significant danger faced by both employers and employees (Mossman, 1995). For instance, a relatively recent national survey conducted by Northwestern National Life Insurance Company (1993) found that during a one-year period, more than 2.2 million workers were physically assaulted while on duty and over 6 million were threatened with violence. In a second study, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1996) found that on average, 20 employees are murdered each week while working and approximately 18,000 individuals are assaulted on the job each week. Currently, homicide is the first leading cause of death for women and the second leading cause of death for men in the American workplace, exceeded only by traffic accidents (Jenkins, 1996; NIOSH, 1997).

As interest in this occupational and mental health topic has grown, numerous authors have noted the paucity of research that examines the consequences of workplace violence (Barling, 1996; Budd, Arvey, & Lawless, 1996; Le-Blanc & Kelloway, 2002; Schat & Kelloway, 2000). It is known, however, that experiencing the abuse of workplace violence can have significant, immediate emotional effects on employees and their families. For instance, Flannery (2001) noted that victimized employees often exhibit anxiety, depression, increases in substance abuse, and have a higher likelihood of committing a subsequent violent act themselves. Depression, anxiety, and low job satisfaction were also found by Driscoll, Worthington, and Hurrell (1995). Budd et al. (1996) found that employees who are victims of violence also experience lower job satisfaction, greater job stress, increased considerations of job change, and an increased likelihood of bringing a weapon to work. Other sets of researchers (Barling, Rogers, & Kelloway, 2000; Rogers & Kelloway, 1997) also found that exposure to workplace violence led to an increased rate of “fear of future violence,” which in turn led to negative psychological and somatic symptoms, as well as increase in intent to leave the organization. All of these studies only investigated the relative immediate consequences of workplace violence on the employee, and none examined the long-term consequences of workplace violence. Little or no longitudinal research data has been collected that would evaluate the long-term emotional effect of workplace violence.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the emotional effects of an incident of workplace violence and abuse on a group of employees over a 10-year period. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to understand the effects of the trauma, the effectiveness of the healing interventions offered, and the longitudinal outcomes.

BACKGROUND

The incident of workplace violence that this study focuses on was a homicide and hostage situation that took place in a 75-bed suburban Utah hospital. The event occurred September 20, 1991, around 11:40 p.m. The gunman, R.W., armed with a hand gun, a shot gun, and bombs, entered this small maternity hospital by breaking in a second story window and came into a patient’s room. An emergency room employee was walking to her car and came face to face with R.W. as he was trying to break into the window. He pointed his gun at her, but for some reason he turned away. She walked back into the hospital and called 911. Meanwhile, the gunman became tangled for a moment in the window blinds in the patient’s room and began shouting obscenities. This awoke the patient, and even though she was heavily sedated and paralyzed from the waist down, she was able to crawl out of her room. With the aid of a nurse, the patient escaped through a fire exit.

The gunman, R.W., was searching for a doctor (Dr. C.) that had, with written consent, performed a tubal ligation on R.W.’s wife two years prior. Even though he had at the time signed the consent, he had never come to terms with this limitation on his fatherhood. He contested the bill for the tubal ligation, and the hospital agreed to forgive the charges in exchange for his release to the hospital and doctor for liability. Even though he agreed and accepted the financial settlement, he still could not accept the situation. Thus, the perpetrator was determined to kill the doctor in revenge for his wife’s sterilization. Yelling and brandishing a shotgun plus a .357 revolver, he cornered Nurse A. and demanded to see Dr. C. Another employee, Nurse B., tried to protect Nurse A., and the gunman marched them both down the hallway at gunpoint. A security guard confronted the trio, and R.W. aimed a gun at his head and ordered him to leave or he would kill them all. The security guard surrendered and backed away.

R.W. forced the nurses to each take a newborn baby from the nursery and push them toward delivery room 2310. The gunman again demanded that Dr. C. be summoned. He threatened to kill the babies and fired the first gunshots randomly into walls and furniture. R.W. kicked in the door to room 2310 where a woman was in labor. He forced the two nurses down the hall and down the stairs leading outside. Around 11:45 p.m., the police reached the hospital’s parking lot. R.W. forced the nurses at gunpoint outside through the main entrance and then propped the doors open so he could reenter. As he continued shouting obscenities, he also made threats to the police that he would kill the nurses. Nurse A. attempted to grab the gun that he held in her side. When she failed to pull it from his grasp, she began to run away. After she took only two or three steps, R.W. cocked his gun and shot her in the back. She died at the scene minutes later. Using Nurse B. as a shield, R.W. proceeded to his car in the parking lot to get some explosives. He then took Nurse B. back into the hospital, went back to room 2310 with the explosives, and ordered its occupants, the laboring mother’s sister, another employee, Nurse C., the expectant father, and the patient-in-labor to get down on the floor.

R.W. held his gun to the laboring patient’s stomach and told her spouse to go outside and get the bombs (that were hidden in the bushes outside the hospital door) and return within two minutes or else he would kill the mother and unborn child. The expectant father had to fight the police to return into the building with the bombs and save his wife and expectant child. The gunman, having already murdered one nurse, was now holding a group of seven people hostage, which included two nurses, a female patient (in labor), her male partner and her sister, and two new-born babies that had been taken from the nursery. At 12:34 p.m., the gunman ordered the hostage group up the stairs to the offices on the top floor of the building. Because the laboring mother had been administered an epidural block, she was paralyzed from the waist down by the anesthesia. Thus, she had to be dragged on a sheet. This left the nurses without equipment, food, and medicine to care for the mother-in-labor and the hostage newborn babies.

Meanwhile, in other parts of the hospital, approximately 70 employees were trying to protect patients (n = 27) and visitors while waiting for the police to allow them to evacuate. The emergency room was the first to be evacuated, but the rest of the hospital proved to be more difficult. It would be three and a half to four hours later before the rest of the employees and patients would get out. During this time many of them were alone, not sure where others were, and hiding in rooms with the doors locked. Numerous shots were being fired, and there was yelling and confusion. Staff and patients quickly became aware that there was an angry gunman somewhere in the hospital and that a nurse had been killed. Word was also given that the gunman had bombs and had planted them in the hospital. During the wait, the power was cut from much of the building and telephone communication was limited. The dark, chaotic atmosphere that this created was reported by the employees to be terror-inducing. Family members of the hostage patients, newborn babies, and employees heard through media reports that their loved ones were being held hostage and that bombs had been planted throughout the hospital.

The police had no idea exactly where the gunman was, how many hostages he had taken, or how many people he had killed. R.W. continued to tell hostages that he was going to kill everyone. The hostages asked if there was anything that they could do to get out alive. He told them, “No, definitely no!” The hostages became aware that his goal was not only to kill Dr. C., but probably to die himself.

The doctors’ offices where they had moved to were well decorated with crystal figurines, mirrors, fine furniture, and artwork. R.W. destroyed everything, including patients’ charts, computer screens, and even the carpet. Rounds of ammunition were shot through windows and computer screens. He then told the hostages that they had to decide who would be killed first.

About three- and one-half hours after the siege had begun, the hospital was finally evacuated except for the seven remaining hostages (the two nurses, two babies, one visitor, one expectant father, and one patient in labor). Around 3:23 a.m., the mother gave birth on the floor with assistance from the nurses. The eight hostages would be held for a total of 18 hours without food or bottles for the babies. Nurse C. was able to create a rapport with the gunman and influenced him to consider surrender. Finally, at 5:33 p.m. the following day, the negotiations with R.W. showed results and he surrendered.

As a result of this event, the employees of the hospital experienced different amounts of trauma and victimization. Some employees were actually held at gunpoint, threatened with death, and watched as their colleague was shot and killed. Other employees never saw the gunman, but heard him and were in constant fear of a possible confrontation as they evacuated patients. They also were never certain whether the bombs that were planted throughout the building would be set off. Finally, other employees had to cope with the violation of their place of employment, death of a co-worker, and the gruesome task of cleaning up the blood and damage at the scene.

METHOD

Immediately after the incident, the hospital administration attempted to respond to the needs of the employees who had been victimized by this incident of violence. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent to the administration that they lacked critical information. For instance, there was no accurate information regarding how many employees were at the hospital at the time of siege, how many subsequently escaped, how many were stopped at the barriers, or how many stayed at home as a result of the news reports. After this initial information was gathered, the hospital administration agreed to conduct both quantitative and qualitative studies in order to gain better information about how many people were affected and how they had adjusted since the event for the purpose of providing more effective interventions and support. The design of this project was reviewed and approved by appropriate Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), and all participants signed informed consent forms to allow the publication of findings. Due to the fact that all participants were healthcare workers in a teaching and research facility, there was a high level of interest, cooperation, and consent. Only one person declined to give consent, and his/her information was not included in this study.

Quantitative assessments consisting of a demographic survey, as well as two clinical instruments (the Impact of Events Scale [IES] and the Symptom Checklist 90-Revised [SCL-90-R]) were given to affected employees 6 months and 5 years after the violent event. Qualitative assessments consisting of formal clinical interviews and focus group discussions were given to affected employees 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 7 years, and 10 years after the incident. During this time period, treatment and support was made available to employees and their families. This support included debriefings, individual counseling, initial support groups, a hospital reopening ceremony, follow-up education sessions, ongoing peer support groups, a chapel dedication, and a memorial service (offered on Memorial Day, 8 months after the event), a one-year anniversary support newsletter, as well as individual and group counseling, initial family debriefing, and initial family support groups. Employees were ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• About the Editors
• Contents
• About the Contributors
• Preface
• Foundations and Overview
• Aggression, Abuse, and Harassment in the Workplace
• Aggression, Abuse, and Harassment in Schools
• Index