The article is devoted to one of the most pressing problems of labor relations — mobbing. This is a form of psychological terror, harassment and pressure on an employee by the team, individuals or the manager. The urgency of the issue under consideration, as well as the importance of the team's psychophysical health as a key asset of the organization, ensuring its competitiveness and sustainable development, have been substantiated.
In this regard, the author has made an attempt to summarize and analyze theoretical and methodological approaches to the definition of “mobbing”, which are necessary for developing an effective system of preventive measures. To achieve this goal, the article uses traditional general scientific methods: analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalization.
Based on numerous studies, the content of mobbing has been presented and the conditions that determine this psychological phenomenon have been identified. The legal aspects of protection against mobbing actions in the legislation of foreign countries and Russia have been studied. It is concluded that mobbing significantly affects mental safety in the workforce, so it is necessary to monitor the facts of its manifestations in the workplace, stop them in a timely manner, and take preventive measures. The author presents a program that includes a system of preventive measures in the following areas: countering mobbing by the organization; countering mobbing by employees; countering mobbing by managers.
This aspect determines the scientific novelty of the work, since existing anti-mobbing programs consider actions by organizations, employees and the state. The results of the implementation of the prevention program for all participants have been formulated. The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the mobbing prevention program can be applied in organizations in various fields of activity that are interested in high labor results and highly effective employee development. Mobbing, labor relations, psychological terror, mobbing prevention program.
Source: The scientific journal of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Social Space”
For a person, professional activity is a source of satisfaction, self-esteem, intellectual and emotional uplift caused by the result and process of work, as well as the social contacts that accompany them. In addition, work provides employment, gives people financial stability, and largely determines the meaning of their life. Work activity as a fundamental basis and an indispensable condition for people's lives is inextricably linked to reality.
It is in the course of work that social contacts outside the family circle are determined, a person's work schedule is structured, the opportunity to participate in achieving collective goals is made, and status and personal identity are achieved [1].
But the same job can mean alienation, oppression, a constant struggle for existence for a person; it can cause frustration, illness, and even somatic and mental illnesses. A synonym for all this is mobbing in its various forms.
Doctor of Psychology H. Hornstein estimates that about 20 million Americans face workplace harassment every day. In the UK, about 30% of working citizens experience labor mobbing. In Sweden, the percentage of mobbing victims ranges from 2.5 to 16.2% [2].
The seriousness of the mobbing problem is confirmed not only by its extent, but also by the severity of its consequences for humans. For example, Duncan Chappell and Vittorio Di Martino's book Violence at Work places mobbing on a par with murder, rape and robbery. According to the authors, individual and group bullying and similar forms of behavior are just as serious as direct physical abuse. In addition, the current instability of many types of jobs creates a tense environment in the workplace, so such forms of violence are increasingly common [1; 3; 4].
Due to the urgency of the problem, the purpose of the study was defined: to study and analyze the phenomenon of “mobbing” in the labor relations system. To achieve the goal, the following tasks have been set and solved:
The concept of “mobbing” is based on the English word “mob”, which literally means “crowd”, “gathering”; “to mob” means oppressing, stalking, rude, attacking, nitpicking. In a simplified sense, mobbing is a phenomenon when a team or part of it takes up arms against one or more of its members in order to expel them [5].
Referring to the history of the use of the term “mobbing” as a scientific concept, we will see that its original meaning was used to refer to the aggressive actions of animals. In the middle of the 20th century, the term “mobbing” was first used by Austrian zoologist and zoopsychologist K. Lorenz to describe the aggressive behavior of some animals towards others, in particular when several small animals team up against a larger opponent [1].
In his book “Aggression”, the researcher presented observations of animals: they become prey one by one, but in a group they attack themselves, including a predator. The scientist focuses on the crucial role of group attack as a factor that adds instinctive courage to defend oneself or one's territory.
After analyzing the results obtained during the research, K. Lorenz concluded that the goal of mobbing in the animal world is two-sided:
1) the enemy receives a preemptive strike, his desire to attack decreases, and in the future, such a mobbed predator more often hunts other species;
2) mobbing allows young offspring to be taught how to face the enemy through joint collective action [5].
In this phenomenon, humans differ from representatives of the animal world in that mobbing in this case is not an interspecific, but an intraspecific struggle.
In psychology and medicine, the term “mobbing” appeared in the late 60s of the XX century. Swedish physician P. Heineman describes a situation about a group attack on a student. Another student approached a large group of students who were spending time chatting. Frustration arose: the person who came up got in the way and broke the group's balance. A previously peaceful group shows aggression: all against one, the victim of the group (pack) is hunted down and destroyed, and the group has returned to its former peaceful atmosphere. P. Heinemann called such an attack “mobbing”.
After the 1972 book “Mobbing. Group violence among children and adults”, where Heinemann compares children's cruel behavior towards other children with aggressive animal behavior and uses the term “mobbing”, this term has gained popularity
Manifestations of mobbing in labor collectives began to be studied and actively discussed in the 1980s. Here, first of all, it is necessary to refer to the research of the Swedish psychologist H. Leyman, because it was he who first used the term in question in its modern sense. Studying the behavior of local officials and clerks, the psychologist noted that intrigues, intolerance and moral violence flourish in companies in such a prosperous country as Sweden. Leyman watched how employees use their money to harass their fellow servant. They include endless criticism, defamation, the spread of negative rumors, misrepresentation, ridicule and boycotts. In the end, such bullying led to stress, neurosis, mental exhaustion, and even suicide attempts. The revealed phenomenon of X. Leyman called “mobbing” and described it as “psychological terror” that includes systematic hostile and unethical actions by one or more people against another person [1].
Using examples, Leyman demonstrates the difference between a single case of negative action and the same action that is repeated over a long period. “A blatant remark made once is and remains a brazen remark. But if it is repeated every day for several weeks in a row, then we are talking about mobbing” [2, p. 17]. According to the author, mobbing takes place if at least once a week the victim feels harmed in any form for six months or more.
Hence, Leyman formulated the following definition of mobbing: “negative communicative actions by one person or group of people that are directed against an individual occur very often or over a long period of time and determine the relationship between the offender and the victim” [2, p. 18].
In his works, the researcher also focused on the fact that men, as a rule, use such mobbing actions as threats, ignoring the object of mobbing, criticizing his political or religious views, constantly interrupting dialogue, and forcing him to work that degrades human dignity. Women are more likely to speak negatively about the victims of mobbing, ridiculing it in front of other members of the team, disseminating inaccurate information, being deprived of the opportunity to speak out, and ridicule physical disabilities.
In addition, Leyman suggested that the health and mental state of a person who has been attacked by employees suffers greatly (there are nervous diseases, there is a feeling of social insufficiency).
Research by H. Leyman aroused scientific and public interest in studying the problem of violence in the workplace, including studying the influence of psychosocial factors in the working environment on the mental and physical health of employees [6].
.
In 1994, Linda and Axel Vaniorek's book Mobbing: When Work Becomes Hell was published in Germany. In it, the authors point to the most common form of psychological terror in the workplace. In their opinion, he follows the following scenario: first, the team looks for a “scapegoat”, finds him and then “bites” his colleague together1.
A more accurate definition of mobbing in the workforce, in our opinion, is given by N. Davenport and co-authors R. Schwartz, G. Elliot in his book Mobbing: Emotional Abuse in the U.S. Workplace [7; 8]. In their opinion, workplace mobbing is the behavior of colleagues, management or subordinates in relation to one of the employees, in which they periodically, for weeks, months and even years, carry out targeted harassment and attacks that infringe upon their self-esteem, reputation and professional competence. The result is psychological trauma and dismissal. The differences between this definition and this X. Leyman is to specify the purpose of mobbing and apply it to the field of labor relations.
According to N. Davenport and her co-authors, mobbing is hard to prevent because it can affect anyone, regardless of age, race, gender, or religion. This type of pressure is closely related to humiliation not only professional but also personal; rumors can spread about the object of persecution, and it can even lead to crime (damage and theft of personal belongings or unfounded accusations of stealing someone else's property). In general, this is partly similar to the behavior of children described by Leyman, when they try to emotionally trample on the victim, but most often they cannot explain why she deserved such a fate [7].
N. Davenport, R. Schwartz, G. In his work, Elliot identified two types of mobbing:
1) vertical mobbing, or “bossing” (boss), is the psychological terror of a boss (manager) against a subordinate;
2) horizontal mobbing involves psychological terror coming from colleagues. As I.V. Yurik notes in the article “Mobbing in the library: causes, consequences and methods of overcoming it”, in the UK, the term “bullying” was originally used to refer to the phenomenon we are considering. At the same time, the credit for developing and popularizing knowledge about bullying belongs to Tim Field, the author of the book “Bullying in sight”.
In the early 90s, when he worked as a top manager, he had to experience psychological terror. This was the reason for him to seriously study the problem of psychological harassment. I agree. To Field, the terms “mobbing” and “bullying” are synonymous [8]. But a number of experts distinguish between these concepts. So, if mobbing, as we have already seen from the definition given by N. Davenport, R. Schwartz, G. Elliot, is a type of psychological harassment by the head of an organization, immediate supervisor, colleague or subordinate who involves others in systematic and frequent bullying (thereby emphasizing that the aggressor is a group of people), bullying is most often interpreted as one-on-one harassment. As noted by N. Davenport and co-authors, in case of bullying, the stalker engages in aggressive behavior, resulting in malicious harassment, cruelty, attempts to insult and humiliate another employee, damage to his reputation, etc. [7]. According to T. Field, and we cannot but agree with him here, there is no fundamental difference between these concepts, because even if the aggressor is a group, there is always a leader who we don't see until a certain time [8].
A special contribution to the study of the phenomenon we are considering in the system of labor relations was made by K. Decks. In 2007, the book “Mobbing. Psychoterror in the workplace and its overcoming”. In it, the author defines “mobbing” as “an escalation of conflict in the workplace. At the same time, systematic hostile attacks are observed quite often and/or over a long period of time and can harm a person and his work” [2, p. 20]
K. Kolodey presents the results of his own study: the prevalence of the phenomenon, mobbing zones, causes, participants, the process, the consequences of mobbing, methods for preventing the phenomenon, examples from the lives of victims of collective attacks [2].
In Russian science, the Soviet geneticist V.P. Efroimson studied the phenomenon we are describing. As noted by A. Morozov, D.A. Bulda, M.V. Borodaeva, in his scientific works on the “pedigree of altruism”, analyze the so-called unethical competition, which means acute relations among genetic scientists. But for his views, the geneticist was persecuted by academician N.P. Dubinin. Historian Vladimir Babkov testifies that the persecution of V.P. Efroimson was stopped only due to direct instructions from the Central Communist Party of the Soviet Communist Party. Despite this, the idea of a “pedigree of altruism” has gained great popularity abroad [9].
At the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, the first publications on labor mobbing appeared in Russia.
Thus, in 1998, G.A. Altukhova's article “Mobbing as an Ethical Problem” described the manifestations of mobbing in library collectives, the motives for mobbing actions, and the devastating consequences of this phenomenon for the victim and the team as a whole. In addition to analyzing mobbing situations in library teams, G.A. Altukhov points out tools to help cope with mobbing.
In 2002, K. H. Recosh's work “Mobbing and the problem of overcoming it in France” was published. Based on an analysis of publications that focused on mobbing studies abroad, the author notes a number of significant characteristics of this phenomenon [10]:
1) the duration of mobbing is from 1 to 5 years;
2) 30-50% of employees become victims of this phenomenon;
3) in education, the prevalence of mobbing is 2 times higher than in other fields of activity;
4) moral harassment is initiated by the boss in 90% of cases.
The main goal of mobbing, as noted by K.H. Recosh, is to bring the employee out of psychological balance. Psychological harassment of an employee in this author's work means multiple negative statements, groundless criticism of the employee, his isolation from the team, the dissemination of deliberately false and negative information about him, etc. [11]. At the same time, as G.A. Altukhova and K.H. Recosh note, such means as ridicule, nit-picking, accusations, insults, misinformation, boycott, defamation, denial, damage to and theft of personal belongings, harm to health, significant bodily harm and other physical violence are also used.
In 2004, A.V. Skavitin published an article “The problem of harassment in the workplace”, which fully and comprehensively describes the main characteristics of mobbing as an interpersonal labor phenomenon. It is also noted that in the case of this phenomenon, we are primarily talking about psychological harassment, mainly group, of an employee by the employer or other employees. Harassment includes constant negative speech, constant criticism of the employee, his social isolation within the organization, the exclusion of social contacts from his official activities, the dissemination of deliberately false information about the employee [12]. According to the author, if the workforce is faced with mobbing, then this is a definite diagnosis in relation to personnel management.
In 2007, Chita University published N.P. Romanova's textbook “Mobbing”, which collected and summarized data published so far on the Russian-language Internet, Runet (more than 20 sources). In it, the author reveals the essence of the social phenomenon called “mobbing” and reveals the causes and mechanisms of this process in the work collective, demonstrating the consequences of its manifestation both for the organization as a whole and for employees exposed to psychological terror at the workplace. As N.P. Romanova notes, the psychological root cause of mobbing is to gain and strengthen the positions of informal leaders (hit the weak and everyone will understand that you are strong)2. Based on the situation when mobbing becomes a reality, the researcher identifies mobbing caused by the team; mobbing, which is caused by the victim; mobbing, which is caused by the manager.
Later, Professor of Psychology S.A. Druzhilov will consider in more detail the problems of mobbing, using the example of the department's work in the context of university reform. In his article, the author defines this phenomenon as a form of psychological violence in the form of bullying an employee in a team with a view to his subsequent dismissal. The goal of mobbing is to bring the employee out of psychological balance [13]. Here, as we can note, S.A. Druzhilov's ideas echo the conclusions of N. Davenport.
In addition to studying the problems of mobbing for organizations and individuals in general, S.A. Druzhilov examines the situation that is common in universities, when harassment in departments is the result of bossing. In other words, mental pressure from the head of the department in relation to one (and then another, etc.) member acts as a trigger for horizontal mobbing and makes such a department inoperable.
In 2012, A.V. Solovyov, in his article “Mobbing: Psychological Terror at the Workplace”, also defined the concept under consideration. In his opinion, in the case of mobbing, we are talking about active moral persecution not only of an individual, but also of an entire social group in the organization where they work. At the same time, the observed phenomenon always contains signs of social conflict and is not related to the category of separate, random actions directed against one employee or group of employees. The mobbing process is always characterized by duration, controllability and focus [14].
A.V. Solovyov also draws attention to the problem of preventing mobbing, which, in his opinion, is related to such activities of society and the state as rulemaking (centralized and local), as well as management (management) in public and private sector organizations of the economy [15].
O.V. Yevtikhov in his article “Mobbing: phases of development and its prevention”, defining mobbing as a phenomenon in which a team or part of it takes up arms against one or more of its members in order to expel them, emphasizes that both young professionals and experienced professionals can become victims of this phenomenon. In addition, the scientist believes that mobbing is an important ethno-psychological mechanism that ensures the aggression of some peoples against others in order to increase their place in the general hierarchy of peoples. And, according to the author, we can observe this phenomenon both at the state level and in labor collectives [16]. Under mobbing in the staff, O.V. Yevtikhov, like most other researchers (S.A. Druzhilov, N. Davenport, T. Field, A.V. Solovyodor), understands collective psychological terror, harassment against any employee by his colleagues, subordinates or superiors, which is carried out in order to force an employee to resign or weaken his social or professional influence in the team.
Summing up the analysis, we note that in modern psychology, which deals with the problem of mobbing in domestic and foreign science, there are no significant discrepancies in terms of definitions of scientific approaches to studying this problem, since socio-economic realities in Russia are currently close to Western standards. So, today “mobbing is the negative communicative actions of one person or group of people (a mobbing subject) that are aimed at, usually against an individual (mobbing object), which occur very often or on over a certain period of time and the determining relationship between the subject and the object of mobbing” [17, p. 462].
In other words, according to V.V. Babkov, the concept of “mobbing” is used in Russian science when it comes to oppressing, humiliating and harassing a person in the workforce, causing him regular and targeted harm (moral and physical) at the workplace in order to force a person to quit3.
However, according to N.P. Romanova, “Russian” psychological terror itself differs from foreign terror. While in foreign companies the most common scenario of bullying is finding a scapegoat and putting friendly pressure from a colleague, in Russia, on the contrary, vertical mobbing, i.e. psychological terror by a boss against a subordinate, is much more common. The main reason for such psychological pressure is the desire to fire an employee when there are no legal grounds for this4.
In addition, Russian sources often use the phrases “psychological pressure”, “psychological pressure”, “discrimination against an employee”, “harassment at the workplace” when describing mobbing; in turn, Western sources define this phenomenon more harshly — “psychological terror” and “psychological violence”. According to I.V. Yurik, the use of more “soft” and “careful” semantic shades in Russian science, which are used when describing psychological terror by our researchers, is probably due to our mentality and to the traditional attitude towards interpersonal conflicts as factors that are not commonly put “on people” [8].
A feature of mobbing in Russian reality is that the victim finds himself alone with the aggressor and takes a rather weak legal position.
As part of the objectives of our study, it is necessary to address the legal aspects of protection against mobbing.
As noted by A. Kireychev in his article “Mobbing as a socio-psychological phenomenon in the field of human resources management”, owners of Western companies with a turnover of millions of dollars quickly realized that it was much more profitable to maintain healthy relations between employees and resolve conflicts at an early stage. Therefore, it has become necessary to adopt legislation that is in the interests of not only potential mobbing targets, that is, ordinary employees, but also management [18].
For the first time, legal regulations to protect against the risks of psychological violence in the workplace were adopted in Sweden and France, and later other European countries, including Norway, Denmark, and the Netherlands, followed suit. For example, in 1993, Sweden's National Occupational Safety Authority passed a provision on workplace harassment for mobbing.
Article 26 of Part I of the European Social Charter, as revised in Strasbourg in 1996 (came into force on 1 July 1999), states that all employees have the right to protection of their dignity while working5. The Council of Europe underlines the obligation of member states to contribute to the prevention of bullying, clearly hostile and offensive actions that are directed against individual employees in their workplace or in connection with their work, and to take the necessary measures to protect employees from such behaviour.
Special laws on legal protection against mobbing have been adopted by Serbia, Belgium, Canada, Finland, Australia, New Zealand and Turkey. A number of countries do not have special anti-mobbing legislation, but legal protection against mobbing is possible there through the application of a number of laws. For example, in Germany, when hiring a new employee, an anti-mobbing agreement is signed with him, which provides a clear and understandable definition of mobbing, as well as recommendations on who to contact if this phenomenon is detected.
Since 2000, US labor law doctrine has recognized the concept of various forms of psychosocial problems in labor relations, but US federal regulations have not yet reflected these issues. At the regional level, some states have legal provisions for protection from psychological violence at work. In recent years, the United States has been actively campaigning for the development of appropriate legislation, initiated and supported by human rights organizations, scientists and practitioners. The situation in Japan and South Korea is about the same: the problem of mobbing is recognized at the national level, but specific legislation on this issue has not yet been adopted.
Thus, we can see that scientists and practitioners pay close attention to the phenomenon of psychoterror in the workplace in most countries. This process is being studied, statistical studies are being carried out, measures to prevent mobbing at work are being developed and implemented, and a zero-tolerance policy for such phenomena is being cultivated.
But the situation in Russia with regard to the fight against psychoterror in the workplace is somewhat different. The phenomenon of mobbing is not reflected in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and other federal laws that regulate social and labor relations. It should also be noted that Russia has no official statistics on the manifestations of mobbing, and there is no data that takes into account business losses due to mobbing actions in the workforce [19].
Today, trade unions do not perform their protective function, and there is no category of moral harassment for judicial authorities, since there are no laws regulating this phenomenon. If mobbing results in the victim's suicide, relatives must prove to the investigation that there is evidence of a crime under Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation — “incitement to suicide”. The only thing that a mobbing victim can currently use to protect their honor and dignity in the case of mobbing is article 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation6:
1) defamation is the dissemination of knowingly false information that discredits the honor and dignity of another person or undermines his reputation (Article 129);
2) insult is a humiliation of the honor and dignity of another person, expressed in an indecent form (art. 130).
The articles submitted provide for a penalty, mandatory labor, correctional labor, and restrictions on freedom. Court applications must be drafted for protection, dignity, business reputation and compensation for non-pecuniary damage or a statement accepting a private prosecution for defamation or insult.
Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides that a citizen has the right to demand that the court refute information discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation if the person who disseminated such information does not prove that it is true7. Therefore, solving the problem of mobbing in Russian reality is becoming an urgent issue that requires close attention and detailed study.
Thus, an analysis of the literature showed that the term “mobbing” was interpreted in its modern sense to refer to targeted psychological terror in the workplace only recently, only in the second half of the 1990s.
In foreign and domestic psychology, the concept of “mobbing” is mostly considered both as group violence against individuals, and as negative communicative actions against one person or group of individuals, and as psychological terror, and as a form of conflict escalation, etc. All these definitions combine two conditions:
1) a psychological phenomenon must occur over a long period of time;
2) mobbing is a group phenomenon that involves two or more people.
Mobbing has a significant impact on mental safety. Along with the constant stress caused by the workload and the dynamics of enterprise development, it forms a common problem of psychological labor protection. Accordingly, it is necessary to monitor the manifestations of mobbing in the workplace and prevent them in a timely manner, as well as take preventive measures.
Prevention is a set of measures aimed at protecting health, preventing the onset and spread of human diseases, improving the physical development of the population, preserving the ability to work and ensuring longevity [20].
Researcher T.A. Svintsitskaya means prevention as a set of preventive measures aimed at maintaining and strengthening the normal state of order [21]. These measures are aimed at preventing, eliminating or neutralizing the main causes and conditions that cause various negative social deviations and other socially dangerous and harmful behavioral deviations.
According to L.P. Kuznetsova, preventive activities require the following:
— identify the causes and conditions of the problem or set of issues that need to be addressed;
— reduce the likelihood or prevent the occurrence of deviations that are not consistent with the system of social standards and norms in the activities and behavior of an individual or group;
— prevent possible psychological, socio-cultural and other conflicts in an individual or group; —preserve, maintain and protect people's optimal standard of living and lifestyle;
— assist an individual or group in achieving their goals, as well as revealing their inner potentials and creative abilities8.
These goals indicate that under certain conditions, every person, any social group, organization or team may need social and preventive measures, regardless of their degree of social well-being at the moment.
The positive result in achieving the goals of a set of preventive measures is largely determined by the fundamental grounds on which these activities are based9. The primary principles are presented at rice.
Thus, preventive activities attach importance to the ability to correctly and flexibly orient themselves in each specific situation, to an objective, scientifically reliable synthesis of factual material, and to a thorough study of all the causes of the deviations that have arisen and the conditions under which they became possible. Preventive activities are usually carried out in the form of a program where the planned actions are aimed at achieving the desired result, at preventing possible problems and monitoring the subsequent condition of the object. In accordance with the conceptual approaches studied in the definition of “mobbing” and its peculiarities in the labor relations system, in order to implement the most effective mechanism for countering and preventing mobbing, it is further advisable to present a program that includes a set of preventive measures. The uniqueness of the program lies in the fact that it involves the participation of the organization as a whole, the team of employees and management. The mobbing prevention program can be applied in organizations in various fields of activity that are interested in high labor results and the highly effective development of employees. The purpose of the prevention program is to create favorable conditions for the successful work of each employee of the organization, as well as to maintain their physical, mental and psychological health.
The objectives of the program:
1) implementing measures to combat and prevent workplace mobbing by the organization, to create an atmosphere of trust and mutual assistance within the organization;
2) implementation of measures to combat and prevent mobbing at the workplace by the organization's employees;
3) providing competent assistance to the heads of the organization in the prevention of mobbing.
To solve these problems, there are areas of preventive actions that can be structured into blocks:
Block 1 — countering mobbing by the organization;
Block 2 — countering mobbing by employees;
Block 3 — opposition to mobbing by managers.
Forms of work: group and individual. The content of the preventive action program by blocks is presented in table.
[[1]]
Fig. Prevention principles
The results of the organization's mobbing prevention program will be:
1) the formed personal resources of the institution's employees, which ensure that they are committed to avoiding mobbing actions against individual employees at their workplace, as well as intransigence with psychological pressure against themselves [22];
2) the organization's formed resources that help curb the manifestations of mobbing in the team, provide support to an employee who has been psychologically harassed and help him stop mobbing actions;
3) the introduction into the organization of mechanisms that ensure the development of an atmosphere of trust and mutual assistance in the team, and motives for refusing mobbing, as well as tools for early detection of cases of psychological harassment of employees.
Summing up, we can conclude that mobbing is an interdisciplinary phenomenon. It is studied by sociologists, psychologists, lawyers, human resources specialists, etc. Such close attention from researchers from various fields is due to the increase in the number of episodes related to violence in the workplace, schools and other groups and groups of people.
We should not underestimate and neglect the destructive impact of mobbing on the business relationships of colleagues in the organization, especially since preserving labor potential is one of the priorities of social policy in modern Russia [23]. Psychological pressure, discrimination, and harassment at work cause significant changes in work behavior, as they affect the health of employees. The organization's management takes a leading position in preventing this phenomenon.
The table. Organizational mobbing prevention program
No. Content of the program Form of work Combating mobbing by the organization 1 Monitoring the microclimate in the workforce - diagnosing employees' satisfaction with labor relations;
- interviewing employees about their exposure to mobbing
- questioning employees who indicated their susceptibility to mobbing in order to identify mobbing actions in the organization
2 Creating a corporate culture based on team cohesion, tolerance and mutual respect; suppressing any manifestations of mobbing actions - developing a code of ethics/code of business conduct in the organization;
- organizing effective communication trainings; business games; seminars; consultations; corporate events, etc.
3 Creating good working conditions - ensuring the transparency of work in the organization
- elimination of excessive and insufficient requirements for employees
4 Supporting productive labor relations in the team through the introduction of coaching practices - coaching or training aimed at developing and improving the social status of an individual in the process of communicating with mentors
Combating mobbing by employees 5 Implementing a policy of non-acceptance of aggressive interaction with colleagues - acceptance of an organizational agreement to protect against mobbing by all employees;
- appointment of consultants from among mobbing officers
6 Announcing the facts of psychological violence in a team - introducing the practice of openly tactful discussion of the facts of mobbing in a team
7 Timely adoption of measures to end any conflict, conflict prevention - inviting a psychologist who practices conflict resolution;
- engaging a neutral third party
Countering mobbing by managers 8 Taking timely measures to stop mobbing in the team - protecting the mobbing facility;
- making administrative decisions
9 Competent assistance in preventing mobbing - trainings for managers to improve competence in conflict prevention and resolution;
- communication trainings
Source: compiled by the author
Understanding and realizing the importance of a healthy moral and psychological climate for the effective work of employees should be present precisely at the level of the organization's management. In preventing and preventing mobbing or overcoming it, the team must involve all participants in the labor process. It is only through cohesive teamwork that significant results can be achieved. In view of this, it is necessary to study the problem of mobbing more deeply and develop effective programs to prevent psychological terror in the workplace.
1. Vaniorek L., Vaniorek A., Borisova I. Mobbing: When work becomes hell Moscow: Interexpert-no-Ledge: Knowledge, 1996. 176 p.
2. Romanova N.P. Mobbing: a textbook. Chita: ChitSU, 2007. 110 p.
3. Babkov V.V. The dawn of human genetics. The Russian eugenic movement and the beginning of human genetics. Moscow: Progress-Tradition, 2008. 772 p.
4. Romanova N.P. Mobbing: a textbook. Chita: ChitSU, 2007. 110 p.
1. Druzhilov S.A. The problem of mobbing at the department in the context of university reform//Higher Education in Russia. 2011. No. 6. PP. 118-122.
2. Kolodey K. Mobbing. Psychoterror in the workplace and methods for overcoming it. Kharkiv: Humanitarian Center, 2007. 364 p.
3. Druzhilov S.A. Professionalism as a condition for individual survival//Ananiev Readings — 2005: scientific materials. -practical conf./ ed. L.A. Tsvetkova, L.M. Shipitsyna. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Press, 2005. PP. 310—312.
4. Balducci C. Mobbing at work: a literature review on defi ning aspects and consequences. Psicologia della salute, 2009, vol. 1, pp. 101—128.
5. Drozdov A. The phenomenon of bullying at school//Social Psychology, 2007. No. 6. PP. 124—132.
6. Kursova O.A. Protection from mobbing in labor relations: problems of legal regulation//Journal. Omsk Law Academician 2014. No 3 (24). PP. 28—31.
7. Davenport N. Emotional abuse at work: a silent hobby? //Personnel Department, 2005. No 9 (56). URL: https://otdelkadrov.by/number/2005/9/521
8. Davenport N., Schwartz R.D., Elliott G.P. Mobbing: emotional abuse in the american workplace. Civil Society Publishing, 1999, pp. 50—68.
9. Luchina E.A. Mobbing and bullying: features of the manifestation of mobbing in Russia//Current problems of aviation and cosmonautics. 2017. No. 13. VOL. 3. PP. 818—820.
10. Modern problems of human resources management: monograph/ed. L.V. Sviridova, V.V. Romanova. N. Novgorod: Volgo-Vyatka Academic State Service Publishing House, 2011. 372 p.
11. Recosh K.H. Mobbing and the problem of overcoming it in France//Truzerubezh. 2002. No. 2. PP. 97—105.
12. Skavitin A.V. The problem of harassment in workplaces (based on foreign studies)//Management in Russia and abroad, 2004. No. 5. PP. 118-126.
13. Korableva N.V. Manifestations of mobbing and bullying at enterprises as a socio-psychological problem//XXXIX scientific. -technical conference at SevkavGTU. VOL. 3. Stavropol: SevkavGTU, 2010. PP. 103-108.
14. Soloviev A.V. Mobbing as an element of social conflict//Kadrovik. 2007. No. 12. PP. 39—46.
15. Soloviev A.V. Mobbing: psychological terror at the workplace//kadrovik.ru. URL: http://www.kadrovik.ru/modules.php? op
16. Evtikhov O.V. Mobbing: development phases and its prevention//Mobbingunet. URL: http:// http://mobbingu.net
17. Avramchuk L.P. Mobbing//Current issues of economic sciences. 2009. No 4 (1). PP. 83—88.
18. Kireychev A.V. Mobbing as a socio-psychological phenomenon in the field of human resources management//Culture of the Black Sea peoples, 2005. No. 58. PP. 43—45.
19. Kursova O.A., Pluzhnik I.L. Legal ideal and legal vacuum: on the issue of employee protection from psychological violence in Russia//Russian Journal of Legal Research 2015. No 3 (4). PP. 186—193.
20. Boykova A.E., Sukhorukov D.V. Prevention of addictive behavior in the context of the educational process//Young Scientist, 2014. No. 2. PP. 730—732.
21. Svintsitskaya T.A. Prevention of deviant behavior in adolescents in social work//Young Scientist, 2015. No. 11. PP. 1224—1226.
22. Patlasov O.Y., Kalmykov I.S. Technologies for countering staff mobbing at the workplace//Human science: humanitarian research. Section. “Economic Sciences”, 2016. No 1 (23). PP. 234—242.
23. Leonidova G.V., Panov A.M., Popov A.V. The labor potential of Russia: problems of savings//Problems of Territory's Development. 2013. No 4 (66). P. 49—57.14
Content is available under license Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
Source:The scientific journal of the Russian Academy of Sciences “Social Space”
.png)
