Research
Early findings on how response visibility shapes retaliation risk in workplace targeting cases.
Ā
When Reporting Fails: Strategic Options for Workplace Bullying Targets
Background
The Gap in the Literature
Workplace bullying research has made enormous progress in the past two decades. We know far more than we once did about why bullying happens, who perpetrates it, what organizational conditions enable it, and what it costs in terms of human suffering and economic impact.
But there is a gap.
Most of the existing research focuses on prevention, organizational policy, and the experiences of targets as they endure mistreatment. What is conspicuously absent from the literature is rigorous, evidence-based guidance for targets themselves. When formal systems fail, when HR sides with the perpetrator, when retaliation follows a good-faith complaint, what then?
The targets in these situations are not passive. They are making strategic decisions under extraordinary pressure. They are weighing risks, calculating tradeoffs, and choosing among imperfect options. Yet the field has given them almost nothing to work with.
This study was designed to fill that gap.
When institutional protections fail, how does the execution approach (overt vs. covert) affect outcomes for workplace bullying targets across different response pathways?
Ā
Theoretical Foundation
The EVLN Framework
This study builds on the established Exit, Voice, Loyalty, Neglect (EVLN) framework from organizational psychology, which describes how employees typically respond to dissatisfaction in the workplace. In the context of workplace bullying, these four pathways look like this:
Voice
Taking action to change the situation. Filing a complaint, confronting the perpetrator, hiring an attorney, going to the media, or reporting to a regulatory body.
Exit
Leaving the situation. Resigning, transferring, or otherwise removing yourself from the environment where the bullying is occurring.
Loyalty
Ā Staying and enduring. Continuing to work, maintaining performance, and hoping the situation resolves or that leadership intervenes.
Neglect
Disengaging while remaining. Doing the minimum, withdrawing effort, or mentally checking out while still physically present.
The existing EVLN research tells us that targets choose among these pathways. What it does not tell us is how the execution of that choice, whether carried out overtly or covertly, affects outcomes. That is the question at the center of this study.
Academic Positioning
ConferenceĀ Presentation
This research has been accepted to the International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment (IAWBH) 2026 Conference in Canberra, Australia, following peer review.
The IAWBH Conference, held biennially since 1998, is the leading international forum for research on workplace bullying, harassment, and related phenomena. It convenes researchers, practitioners, and policymakers from around the world to present and discuss the latest scholarship in the field.
ConferenceĀ
IAWBH 15th Biennial International Conference
LocationĀ
Canberra, Australia
Dates
June 3-5, 2026
Theme
"How Do We Solve a Problem Like..."
Presentation Type
Individual Presentation
Status
Accepted for Presentation
Sources
Key References
Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2003). Raising voice, risking retaliation: Events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(4), 247-265.
Namie, G., & Namie, R. (2009). The bully at work: What you can do to stop the hurt and reclaim the dignity on the job (2nd ed.). Sourcebooks.
Withey, M. J., & Cooper, W. H. (1989). Predicting exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(4), 521-539.
Workplace Bullying Institute. (2024). U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey.
See how these findings apply to your situation.
The free Workplace Targeting Assessment is built on this research. It measures the impact of workplace targeting across 6 critical areas of your life in 10 minutes.
START THE 10-MINUTE ASSESSMENT