INDUSTRIAL PSYCHOLOGY NOTES
LECTURE 1–Aggression and harassment in the workplace.................................................................2
LECTURE 2-Stress and well-being at work..........................................................................................9
LECTURE 3-Stress and wellbeing at work part II...............................................................................15
LECTURE 4-Leadership......................................................................................................................22
LECTURE 5-Team work......................................................................................................................27
,LECTURE 1–Aggression and harassment in the workplace
1-Aggression at work
Aggression is ‘Any behaviour intended to harm another person who does not wish to be harmed’ (Anderson & Bushman,
2002).
There are three important characteristics to this definition of aggression:
1. It’s observable behaviour
2. The behaviour is intended to cause harm
3. The victim is motivated to avoid that harm
Workplace aggression: an aspect of counterproductive workplace behaviours and encompasses any act of aggression,
physical or verbal, that causes physical or emotional harm in the workplace.
Examples of workplace aggression:
Threatening behaviour e.g. ‘squaring up’ to another worker in an attempt to engage in physical intimidation.
Verbal abuse, often including swearing and yelling
Rude gestures
Damage to staff property (e.g. stealing)
Assault – more commonly defined as workplace violence
Obstruction – preventing someone from doing their job
1.1 - General Aggression Model (GAM)
It was design to provide a holistic overview to understand aggression - it doesn’t
only include information of aggression at work but anywhere (including
interrelationship aggression and aggression in context like pubs and so on). GAM
aims to describe aggression within a single episode and situation.
Model developed by Anderson & Bushman (2002) is described in the diagram and
it’s divided into three critical stages:
1) Inputs: includes Person & situation
2) Routes: Internal states - affect, arousal, cognition
3) Outcomes of appraisal and decision-making that then leads to either
thoughtful vs. impulsive action.
This outcome feedbacks into the situation producing a circular process.
1.2 - GAM phases (Allan & Anderson, 2017)
Person factors:
Normative perceptions of aggression:
aggression is considered a valid
behaviour within any given situation.
Individuals with hostile attribution bias
are more likely to interpret the behaviour
of others as a precursor of violence -
even if the original behaviour was
ambiguous- leading to anger and
retaliation.
Situation factors:
Presence of fearful stimulus: The
presence of guns can increase the risk of
violent behaviours when someone is
already angry.
,Essentially, input variables can influence individual moods and emotions, e.g. if a person is exposed to uncomfortable
temperature and have a personality incline to hostility, they might get angry and distress, which makes them more likely to
engage in aggression. They can also impact cognition, e.g. exposure to aggressive media can lead to priming of aggression
and this can increase the likelihood of an aggressive response. Finally, they can increase or decrease arousal levels, which can
then influence the likelihood of aggression too, e.g. if a person is provoked when they are on a stage of high arousal, then
they may be more likely to respond aggressively.
Routes:
There are three main routes through which the variables we have covered might influence the outcomes within a situation:
affect, cognition and arousal. They can interact with one another and then influence the decision and appraisal process of the
individual.
Outcomes:
Focuses on decision and appraisal processes. They can lead to thoughtful or impulsive action. This actions then influence the
encounter and then influence the person and situation factors giving you the cyclic process.
Appraisal is influenced by personal and situational factors along three routed that include assessment of mood, goal of any
behaviour and intentions of others how do we feel about something? What would be the goal of any behaviour I engage in?
Following action decisions are made: if there’s time available and the initial appraisal indicates that the situation is important
and meaningful, but we want more information, we’ll engage in a deeper appraisal to determine a more thoughtful action.
However, if there’s less time available or not sufficient resources or the situation is not as important, the person is more likely
to engage in impulsive action.
So, this model presents an overview of how an aggressive incident might develop and the factors that might increase the
likelihood of aggression occurring generally.
1.3-Organisation motivated aggression model (O’Leary-Kelly, Griffin & Glew, 1996)
This focuses on aggression specifically in the workplace and
links this to factors within the organisation such as policy,
procedure and culture. The authors of the model suggest that
aggression can be a learnt behaviour and can be prompted by
external cues and reinforcement. Highlighting an individual’s
experience and factors in the environment can act as a
precursor of aggression.
Individual contributions:
Social learning theories indicate that people who engage in
aggression and receive positive outcomes (e.g., get away with
it), learn to exhibit that aggressive behaviour the more they
receive a positive outcome. Similarly, if a person sees others being rewarded for having an aggressive behaviour, this
encourages them to engage in aggressive behaviour themselves. This suggests that based on past experiences, some
individuals are more likely to engage in aggressive behaviour than others depending on their own experiences and
observations, what others do and its outcome.
Organisational contributions:
Aggression can also be influenced by environmental cues, e.g. competition between departments - any attempt to interact
might result in aggression - if this is repeated over time, this can result in co-workers from different departments acting
aggressively even if they meet in a corridor.
In addition, the consequences for aggression influence the likelihood of that behaviour: if the aggressive behaviour is
rewarded by the supervisor, and the workplace culture is considered generally competitive and aggressive, this increases the
likelihood of aggression occurring at work.
Aversive treatment from co-workers and supervisors is also reward for aggression (i.e., promoting people that manipulate
others also increase the likelihood of aggression at work).
Organisational response to aggression (e.g., security cards, procedure responses, adverse consequences for the aggressor...)
may be successful or open a way for organisational violence as the next step. Essentially, organisational aggression, if not
dealt with successfully, can then lead to organisational violence.
, The model highlights the importance of consideration of organisational antecedents and the removal and control of them in
the workplace.
1.4-Antecedents of workplace aggression (Glomb, 2002)
Tend to include these 5 elements:
Job stress: Work based issues, difficulties,
problems, pace of work might lead to
aggressive behaviour down the line.
Organisational injustice: Passed over for
someone less qualified, promotion not
achieved, the outcome of certain behaviours
are different according to the work engaged
in that behaviour any sense of injustice
can lead to aggression.
Job conflicts: Person not doing their job,
conflict over procedures, authority conflicts
(who is the leader?)
Individual factors: Hostile personality, hot
temperament, quick to anger potentially
related to past experiences or the outcomes
of aggression.
Interpersonal conflicts: Personality clash - can lead to rudeness, aggression and violence within the workplace
*All three examples led to an aggressive altercation and were linked to adverse outcomes including more stress and increased
likelihood of quitting intention and reduced job satisfaction.
1.5 - Potential impacts of aggression at work
Reduced job satisfaction of the person perceiving aggression, less satisfied.
Decreased work performance - engage more poorly with their job
Increase job stress (increasing likelihood of more aggression)
Withdrawal from work/quitting intention
Poor working relationships with others
Adverse emotional response (e.g., guilt, anger, upset)
Possibility for positive outcome: ‘clearing the air’, sorting out issues
The adverse impacts tend to be more frequently reported
1.6 - Impact of patient aggression in pharmacy (Irwin, Laing & Mearns, 2013)
Eighteen pharmacists interviewed using the critical incident technique (i.e., discuss negative/positive situation and how they
acted and how the outcomes worked). They were asked to talk about a time where they positively and negatively engaged
with an aggressive patient and what they thought the antecedents could be.
Causes of aggression:
o External: Waiting times, brand of medication different, refusal to dispense medication
o Internal: Lack of understanding of pharmacists’ role, patient personality, intoxication
o Interactional: Patient becomes aggressive whilst discussing medication
Impact of aggression:
o Cognitive: Reduced concentration, risk of dispensing error increased, pharmacist cannot focus on task
o Emotional: Distress, witness distress in others, anger for injustice
o Social: Hesitant to engage with patients, concern for patient, thoughts about career change
Coping with aggression using non-technical skills
o Leadership: Taking responsibility for aggressive incident, protect team members, authoritative approach
(ask the patient to leave)
o Task management: Organise staff members, manage patient behaviour, manage task
o Situation awareness: Staff safety, monitor actions, monitor patient
