Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative-interpretive analysis reveals workplace bullying and harassment impact employee wellbeing in South Africa, indicating an urgent need for organizational intervention.
Orientation: Workplace bullying, victimisation and harassment (WBVH) are anomalies at government departments and have dire short and long-term implications for employees and departments. Research purpose: The study explored government employees’ experiences of WBVH pre-2024 national elections. Motivation: WBVH repercussions for organisations and employees are generally acknowledged to be counterproductive health and safety concerns, and victims are not required to prove that WBVH occurred. Research approach/method: A qualitative-interpretive grounded theory was employed to examine WBVH among government senior, middle and lower-level employees across national and provincial departments in South Africa. Main findings: The findings highlight that WBVH is a mental stressor and occupational and psychological hazard affecting employees, irrespective of race, gender, or ethnicity. It is on par with harmful physical injuries, emotional and psychological diseases, disorders and disabilities. It influences careers, families, marriages, relationships, and performance. The study demonstrated a very high prevalence of WBVH between women, and women to men, rather than men to women, vertically and horizontally. Practical/managerial implications: Government employees are at a high risk of WBVH at work and outside of work, impairing their well-being, resilience, self-esteem, career, work-life harmony, innovation, stimulation, and self-actualisation. Failure by the employer to decisively discipline senior officials for WBVH neglect or biased management could hamstring employment prescripts of peaceful intentions, pro-social behaviour, victims’ healing and zero-WBVH tolerance. Contribution: This study adds to the subject of WBVH and peaceful interventions for employees in South Africa’s government context.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Molotsi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: