The issue of workplace sexual harassment continues in many work environments (Chan et al., 2008; Mainiero, 2020; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012; Nunez & Ollo-López, 2021). In recent decades, scholars have measured its detrimental consequences and found lower job satisfaction (authors; Bowling & Beehr, 2006), work withdrawal, job stress, decreased life satisfaction, and psychological distresses such as anxiety and depression (Chan et al., 2008; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). Experienced in early career stages, sexual harassment can have long term negative effects like depressive symptoms (Houle et al., 2011). Although sexual harassment can occur within and between all genders, women are more likely to experience sexual harassment than men, and the intersection of race and gender also increases experienced sexual harassment with racial and ethnic minority women being the most at risk (Berdahl & Moore, 2006).

One critical initiative to counter sexual harassment is anti-sexual harassment policies–often instituted through corporate or legal mandates within organizations. Effective anti-sexual harassment policies serve as preventive measures and are central to eradicating workplace sexual harassment (Dekker & Barling, 1998; Gruber & Smith, 1995; Pryor et al., 1993). In principle, anti-sexual harassment policies “should be designed to deter those who might harass, encourage those who would report harassment, and protect harassment targets” (Bell et al., 2002, p.163). Nevertheless, understanding the continued commonality of workplace sexual harassment, this study seeks to identify to what extent policies follow best practices and to test the effectiveness of policies.

This study uses a mixed methods design with a survey of news personnel and an analysis of anti-sexual harassment policies from news organizations in Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The focus on Sub-Saharan African countries adds to current calls for addressing “voice and power, especially in developing countries” (McCarthy & Muthuri, 2018, p. 133) and gendered institutions across hierarchies in the Global South (McCarthy & Moon, 2018). The mixed methods approach of this study compares anti-sexual harassment policies to best practice guidelines and examines experienced and reported sexual harassment with and without the presence of anti-sexual harassment policies.

Anti-Sexual Harassment Policy Guidelines

Although there is no universal singular standard of a “good” anti-harassment policy, there are guidelines that a robust policy should typically include (Alexander et al., 2005; Bell et al., 2002; Dekker & Barling, 1998; Foster & Fullager, 2018; Fusilier & Penrod, 2015; Gouws & Kritzinger, 2007; Gruber & Smith, 1995; Jacobson & Eaton, 2018; McCann, 2005; Pryor et al., 1993; Wilken & Badenhorst, 2003)—understanding that organizations should opt for legal counsel before finalizing their policies to ensure they are following protocols within their jurisdiction. Based on the previous literature, we identify five main categories of guidelines: Defining sexual harassment, reporting mechanisms, complaint processing, communication, and monitoring. In the following, we present a synthesis of the five main categories (see Table 1 for complete list).

Table 1 Anti-sexual harassment policies vs. best practice guidelines (N = 17)
Full size table

Firstly, an effective anti-harassment policy should clearly define what constitutes sexual harassment. Definitions of workplace sexual harassment typically consider two broad categories, which are “quid pro quo” and “hostile environment” (Alexander et al., 2005). Quid pro quo relates to sexual harassment that affects employment conditions. This includes demands for sexual activity as a condition for hiring, promotions, or other work-related benefits. Quid pro quo is often underscored by threats of firing or other adverse effects for non-compliance. Hostile environment relates to unwelcome sexual behaviours that result in intimidating and offensive work environments (Fusilier & Penrod, 2015). Policies should define both categories of sexual harassment and provide detailed descriptions of specific behaviours that constitute sexual harassment (Becton et al., 2017). Scholars have also noted the need to identify the wide range of potential harassers, acknowledging power imbalances, and the possibility of harassment from external parties such as customers (Foster & Fullager, 2018; Gettman & Gelfand, 2007). Definitions should also include stressing “zero tolerance” for sexual harassment (Jacobson & Eaton, 2018; McCann, 2005) and sex-neutral language to acknowledge the sexual harassment of all people (McCann, 2005).

Secondly, policies must outline safe reporting mechanisms with multiple reporting channels that can be utilized by those who have experienced or witnessed sexual harassment (Bell et al., 2002; Fusilier & Penrod, 2015). Possible points of contact typically include direct supervisors, HR managers, organizational counsellors, colleagues, union representatives, equality officers, or other designated individuals within the company (Alexander et al., 2005; McCann, 2005). Policies should also offer individuals the opportunity to report to someone of their same gender (Stokes et al., 2000; Fusilier & Penrod, 2015). Importantly, it should be stipulated complainants will not face retaliation (Bell et al., 2002; Foster & Fullager, 2018).

Thirdly, policies must explain complaint processing procedures and timelines of investigating a complaint. Alexander et al. (2005) outline steps to follow once a complaint is made. Investigations should be conducted by the HR department or an external party. Investigations typically include interviews with the accuser, the accused, eyewitnesses (if any), and other individuals who may offer useful information (if applicable). The privacy of all parties is protected during the investigation process (Becton et al., 2017). Once an investigation is complete, an outcome is decided, and the next course of action is determined based on policy guidelines (Alexander et al., 2005). Types of disciplinary actions range from “verbal and written warnings or an adverse performance evaluation, to suspension, transfer or demotion and ultimately to dismissal” (McCann, 2005, p. 58). Effective policies identify support available for those reporting the claim like leave from work or counselling services (McCann, 2005).

Fourthly, the success of anti-harassment policies is determined by the organizational communication on the policy (Sadler et al., 2018; Tinkler & Zhao, 2020). Research shows it’s not enough for an organization to simply adopt a policy due to potential employee backlash (Tinkler et al., 2007). Regular training and education about the policy can improve workers’ knowledge and understanding of acceptable workplace conduct (Bell et al., 2002; Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2003). Gutworth and Howard (2019) suggest training include behavioral strategies such as conflict management training to encourage empathy and competence in staff.

Organizational communication and training must also consider how policies are situated in complex cultural norms and power structures, which often victim blame, protect the perpetrator, and present insurmountable challenges of “proving” oneself to be believed (Fraser, 2015). The false, but widely held beliefs about sexual harassment have been labelled as sexual harassment myths, which include the person was asking for it, they’re lying, the perpetrator didn’t mean to, and it’s the victim’s responsibility to stop the harassment (Exposito et al., 2014; Kara & Toygar, 2019; Lonsway et al., 2008).

Sexual harassment myths contribute to the normalization of patriarchal violence and hostile sexism (Diehl et al., 2018). Moreover, patriarchal norms and gendered inequalities are rampant in many contexts (Hardt et al., 2022). Focusing specifically on the sampled countries in this study, previous research shows sexual harassment and violence are often downplayed through societal norms. A national study in Botswana documented widespread sexist attitudes that include women are to blame when they experience sexual violence (Links, 2012; Machisa & van Dorp, 2012). Sexual harassment is under-reported across various sectors in Kenya due to fear of retaliation, stigmatization, victim blaming, and alienation (authors; Kuira, 2022; Muasya, 2014; Nyaga, 2020; Wangusi et al., 2018). In Malawi, Duma et al. (2016) found rampant sexual harassment of nurses with little organizational protection. Other studies show similar patterns of experienced sexual harassment and violence without support for victims (Dzimadzi & Klopper, 2007; Mwenelupembe, 2022). Newman et al. (2011) found that gender inequalities and discrimination increase levels of sexual harassment and violence for women in Rwanda’s health sector. While Nuwabaine et al.’s (2023) analysis of a national survey in Rwanda recommended increased education on demystifying cultural beliefs that normalize sexual violence. In depth interviews of adolescents and adults in Tanzania showed social norms are closely tied to gender power dynamics and consent—with a lack of understanding in identifying sexual harassment (Wamoyi et al., 2022). Investigating causes of sexual harassment in Ugandan universities, Kebirungi (2021) found limited awareness and a culture of silence amongst stakeholders. In Uganda’s public health sector, sexual harassment reporting is supressed by real or threatened retaliation, victim-blaming and gaslighting (Newman et al., 2021). Similar results were found in other sectors in Uganda (Namuggala & Oosterom, 2023; Oosterom et al., 2023). Several studies have identified sexual harassment as a problem at the University of Zambia, with perceptions of its severity differing by gender (Kampyongo et al., 2017; Menon et al., 2009, 2014). Bowman and Brundige (2013) report that sexual harassment and gendered norms of sexism and sexualization were rife in primary schools in Lusaka. Studies on secondary and post-secondary institutions in Zimbabwe also found sexual harassment is common, gendered, and under-reported citing cultural barriers (Chireshe & Chireshe, 2009; Mapuranga et al., 2015; Mlambo, 2014; Shumba & Matina, 2002).

Therefore, because eliminating sexual harassment in the workplace is a gender-equalizing goal that can be resisted by those who hold gender stereotypical societal beliefs (Tinkler, 2013; Worthen, 2021), organizations must counter gendered beliefs through communication and training. For example, previous research shows that sensitizing messaging against sexual harassment within organizations increases the understanding and reaction to sexual harassment when compared to neutral messaging (Galesic & Tourangeau, 2007). Similarly, Guizzo and Cadinu (2021) found messaging against objectification lowers sexist attitudes and gender-harassing behaviours. Furthermore, Lonsway et al.’s (2008) research suggests individuals who have received sexual harassment awareness training are less likely to accept myths such as “she wanted it” than untrained individuals.

Fifthly, organizations should monitor and evaluate the policy regularly to ensure it is being implemented effectively (Becton et al., 2017; Gutworth & Howard, 2019). This is an important step that is often overlooked by organizations, which means there is little self-reflection on the part of organizations. Most often, organizations introduce an anti-sexual harassment policy to check a box, but without any monitoring there is little accountability and most often sexual harassment continues.

Based on these five categories, we first seek to understand how the sampled policies compare to best practices by asking:

RQ1: How do anti-sexual harassment policies compare to best practice guidelines?

Sexual Harassment in the Workplace

Anti-sexual harassment policies have been developed over the past decades as research and activism have exposed its commonality and devastating effects. There is now ample research that outlines consistent patterns of the commonality of sexual harassment in many countries (Adams et al., 2020; Kearl et al., 2019). Similarly, sexual harassment in the news industry is also high (International Women’s Media Foundation, 2013; North, 2016; Blumell et al., 2023).

Sexual harassment has devastating effects to individuals and workplaces. In meta-analyses on the effects of workplace sexual harassment, Bowling and Beehr (2006), Chan et al. (2008), and Willness et al. (2007) similarly reported that experienced workplace sexual harassment led to significantly decreased levels of job satisfaction and other job-related impacts. Other results include psychological distress and negative effects on one’s physical well-being. Houle et al. (2011) found long term depressive effects on those who experienced sexual harassment in their early careers, which lead to feelings of anger and self-doubt. Research in Sub-Saharan Africa shows that workplace sexual harassment leads to feelings of shame and anger (Tollstern et al., 2020), and increases work stress (Bowen et al., 2013).

Understanding the importance of anti-sexual harassment policies to eliminate sexual harassment from the workplace, the second area of analysis tests the effectiveness of policies by asking:

RQ2a: How do policies contribute to the prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace?

RQ2b: How do policies contribute to the correction of sexual harassment in the workplace?

Method

This study is part of a joint project with Women in News WAN-IFRA to eliminate sexual harassment in the news industry. The focus of this study is on Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. A mixed methods approach was used for this study to collect diverse data that feed into a more complete understanding of the issue (Creswell, 2013). By using a survey of news personnel (N = 575) and an analysis of anti-sexual harassment policies (N = 17), the researchers were able to evaluate the policies and investigate the effectiveness of policies by measuring the experiences of news personnel. Ethical approval was granted before data collection began.

Survey

To develop an understanding of policies and their potential impact on employees, a survey was created using Qualtrics by the lead researcher. It was first piloted within the partnered organization by local representatives in each sampled country to ensure equivalence (Wirth & Kolb, 2012). Feedback meetings were conducted with the local representatives that resulted to adjustments to the survey wording.

After the survey was piloted in each sampled country, the partnering organization contacted the major media houses in each country to distribute the survey link through their HR and senior managers. The survey was distributed to African based news organizations only and excluded international news organizations with divisions in Africa such as the BBC. Since the study focused on policy implementation, smaller organizations, start-ups, and alternative news media were also excluded. This was to ensure all sampled news media organizations had an HR department.

The survey link was also distributed to pre-existing lists of news professionals identified by the partnering organization. Data collection began in July 2020 and ended October 2020. All data collection was in English. After the initial qualifying questions, 635 participants began the survey with 583 completing. Eight participants completed the survey but were from African countries outside the sample and so were removed, to make the final number 575. The survey took an average of 19 min to complete. Table 2 shows the breakdown of participants by country.

Table 2 Survey participants demographics
Full size table

Measures

The survey consisted of 33 closed questions and one open-ended question. The survey questions were based on previous research by the authors (Blumell & Mulupi, 2021; 2022) and the partnering organization who has expert understanding of the sampled countries (WIN, n.d.). Questions were divided by verbal and physical sexual harassment to help participants identify different types of harassment. Verbal sexual harassment (VH) was defined in the survey as, “This occurs when a person receives unwanted sexual attention through verbal or written comments.” Physical sexual harassment (PH) was defined in the survey as, “Physical harassment is when someone uses physical force to have sexual contact with another person against their will.” A third variable measured if participants had witnessed either VH or PH in the workplace. These variables were reported as categorical variables with the options: never, one time, two-four times, five or more times, or I can’t remember.

If participants answered yes to experienced sexual harassment, they were then asked if they had reported their experiences as a categorical variable (I didn’t report, I reported all of my experiences, I reported most of my experiences, I reported some of my experiences, I can’t remember). If the participant reported at least one of their experiences of sexual harassment, they were then asked to indicate all the ways the organization responded (nothing, case dismissed after review, perpetrator was warned, perpetrator was transferred, perpetrator was suspended, perpetrator was fired, police were informed, the victim was provided emotional support, the organization provided training for staff against sexual harassment, and other). Participants were then asked to indicate the source of sexual harassment (fellow employee, direct supervisor, higher management, news source, other). The survey also asked if participants were aware of an anti-sexual harassment policy at their current news organization, and several demographic questions (gender, experience, and education). Finally, participants could add any additional thoughts in an open-ended question.

In total, there were 70.1% women, 27.5% men, and 2.4% gender non-conforming participants. The participants worked for various media (participants could indicate more than one medium): TV (24%), print (52.9%), online (41.4%), radio (38.4%), and other (3.7%). Half of participants were journalists/interns (50.2%), followed by editors/producers (35%), and non-editorial/technical staff (15%). Regarding education, 57% of participants had a bachelor’s degree in college (4 years), 25.3% had some college but no degree, 13.7% indicated an MA degree, and the remaining 3.8% had a high school diploma or less. Years of experience varied from 0 to 1 year (7.8%), 2–4 years (22.4%), 5–7 years (19.1%), 8–9 years (11.3%), 10 or more years (39.4%).

Policy Analysis

The second methodology was a qualitative content analysis with a “directed approach” (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005, p. 1281) to analyze anti-sexual harassment policies provided to the researchers by the sampled news organizations. The directed approach is a deductive strategy that identifies coding variables based on previous research, which in this case, were the best practice guidelines identified in the literature review (Alexander et al., 2005; Becton et al., 2017; Fusilier & Penrod, 2015). Once the five main categories and subcategories were identified as shown in Table 1, the researchers independently reviewed the policies and organized the policies by the categories and subcategories. They then compared notes and finalized the results through frequency counts of each subcategory and corresponding passages.

Findings

The findings are divided into two subsections to address the research questions according to methodology.

Policies vs. Best Practice Guidelines

The first area of analysis was to answer RQ1, which asked how the sampled anti-sexual harassment policies compared with best practice guidelines. Table 1 shows the frequencies found for each of the five main categories and their subcategories. They were coded by yes, no, and partially for instances when the policy included some of the subcategory but not all.

Ambiguous Definitions

Table 1 shows that eleven policies presented a thorough definition of sexual harassment acknowledging both “quid pro quo” and “hostile environment” forms of harassment. In addressing quid pro quo harassment, one policy stated it prohibited sexual and sex-based behaviour when “submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term and condition of an individual’s employment.” Four policies did not offer a definition, while two only addressed hostile environment in their definitions but did not acknowledge quid pro quo. To supplement the definition of sexual harassment, eleven policies also provided detailed lists of specific forms of sexual harassment categorized as verbal, non-verbal, and physical abuse. These included sexual advances, sexual jokes, displays of pornographic material, job related sexual threats, indecent exposure, leering, attempted rape, sending sexually explicit emails or text messages, and unwelcomed physical contact.

Through investigating how policies define sexual harassment, cultural influences emerged. For instance, the common response to doubt victims (also called survivors) coming forward (Houle et al., 2011) was included in policy definitions. Three policies threatened punishment against “false complaints.” One policy stated, “Making of false and frivolous claims of sexual harassment by any person is prohibited. Any person found guilty of making such claims shall be dismissed.” While organizations might have legitimate concerns about the possibility of false complaints, such statements could deter victims from coming forward if they perceive a false complaint to be any claim that is not backed up by ample evidence or multiple witnesses. In fact, one policy explicitly stated that complaints had to be proven by two or more people.

Additionally, three policies indicated they would not be applicable in instances of consensual relationships, thus ignoring the power dynamics that could lead to coerced “relationships” between supervisors and junior employees. It also ignores that sexual harassment and abuse still occur within romantic relationships. For example, one policy included, “Sexual harassment is not present where mutual attraction and consent is involved in the behaviour of the parties concerned, and the matter is therefore regarded as a private one.” On the other hand, seven policies did acknowledge power imbalances. One policy observed that an individual might actively participate in conduct they find offensive “if they feel threatened or intimidated in unequal relationships, e.g., between a superior and a subordinate or between an older employee and a younger employee.”

Overall, the analyzed policies fulfilled or partially fulfilled the defining sexual harassment category more than the remaining categories, but still had notable absences such as a lack of acknowledging power imbalances and internal and external environmental threats.

Weak Reporting Mechanisms

Only nine policies acknowledged the risks victims face after reporting harassment by offering guarantees of no retaliation for those who report. One such policy noted, “Any person who retaliates against an individual reporting sexual harassment or filing a sexual harassment complaint is subject to company disciplinary procedures up to and including termination or expulsion…” Most policies neglected to offer support to victims. Eleven policies provided victims and complainants with diverse options including reporting to immediate supervisors, other managers outside the victims’ direct line of supervision, trade union representatives, health and safety officers and HR officials. One policy clarified that “no employee shall ever be required to report or lodge a complaint of sexual harassment to the person who is the subject of the complaint.” Generally, sexual harassment is an under-reported crime and those who do report can face backlash (Hart, 2019). As such, the analyzed policies lacked protection for those wanting to report, which could deter people from reporting at all.

Uncertain Complaint Procedures

In all, 13 policies outlined potential forms of punishment against perpetrators of sexual harassment. However, six of these policies used vague language that did not acknowledge the severity of cases or offer more specific forms of disciplinary actions beyond stating the possibility of firing. These six policies typically threatened that a perpetrator would “face disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal from employment” or “disciplinary action, up to and including termination or expulsion.” Seven policies offered a wider range of potential sanctions including demotion, transfer, adverse performance evaluation, suspension, probation, dismissal, formal apologies, and mediation.

One such policy stated that the disciplinary measured issued would depend on the “severity and frequency of the harassment…the weight of the evidence [and] the wishes of the person who was harassed.” Under consideration would be the perpetrator’s level of remorse, whether they had been involved in previous incidents or received previous warnings, and “whether the harasser could have been expected to know that such behavior was a breach of policy.” Notably, four policies did not include the potential disciplinary actions that would be instituted against harassers. The policies also had unclear timelines, and how or if organizations would investigate complaints.

Poor Organizational Communication

In total, 12 policies didn’t outline mandatory anti-sexual harassment training procedures for their staff. Similarly, only seven policies explicitly stated the role of managers and supervisors in creating a safe work environment and ensuring that their staff are aware of the sexual harassment policy. One policy stated, “It shall be the responsibility of every manager to ensure that all those who report to him or her are aware of this policy.” In all, most of the policies failed to emphasize the role of managers and excluding plans to disseminate the policy and train staff.

Little Emphasis on Monitoring

Less than half of the examined polices included monitoring procedures. In total only seven policies included a clause to observe the effectiveness of the policy. Furthermore, six stated intentions to audit the successes and failures of the document and make necessary adjustments. Without monitoring in place (García-Sánchez et al., 2021), there is an increased chance for organizations to fail to see if their policies are being implanted and if they are effectively addressing the problem.

Policy Impact on Preventing and Correcting Sexual Harassment

The second research question asked how policies contribute to the prevention and correction to sexual harassment. Initial tests were run to understand the frequency of sexual harassment in the sampled countries. A chi-square was run between gender and frequency of VH (X2(8) = 74.72, p < .001) and PH (X2(8) = 36.42, p < .001). Tables 3 and 4 show the breakdown of the variables. On average, 56.3% of women reported experiencing VH at least once and 38.5% reported experiencing PH. On the other hand, 24.7% of men reported experienced VH, and 15.2% reported experienced PH. Though it was a small sample, 50% of gender non-conforming participants reported experienced VH and 35.7% PH.

Table 3 Verbal sexual harassment by gender
Full size table
Table 4 Physical sexual harassment by gender
Full size table

Next, a chi-square was run between countries and frequency of VH (X2(28) = 74.52, p < .001) and PH (X2(28) = 48.91, p < .01). Tables 5 and 6 show the breakdown of the variables. The country with the most frequently reported VH was Kenya with 67.5% of participants reporting 1 or more experiences. Kenya also had the highest rates of PH with 44.6% of participants reporting 1 or more experiences. The country with the lowest levels of VH was Rwanda at 32% and the lowest levels of PH was Malawi at 16.3%.

Table 5 Verbal sexual harassment by country
Full size table
Table 6 Physical sexual harassment by country
Full size table

To understand if there were reporting differences between countries, a one-way ANOVA was run between the policy variable and the reporting variables that were combined to form an index variable. The analysis showed no significance, F(7, 314) = 1.83, p > .05. To understand if there were differences between countries and action taken by organizations, a one-way ANOVA was run between the policy variable and the action variables that were combined to form an index variable. The analysis showed no significance, F(7, 80) = 1.32, p > .05.

Finally, a chi-square was calculated between countries and the anti-sexual harassment policy variable with significance, X2(14) = 43.85, p < .001. Table 7 shows the results. The country with the highest rate of policies was Kenya (with no training) and Rwanda (with training). The country with the lowest rate was Botswana.

Table 7 Anti-sexual harassment policy by country
Full size table

To answer RQ2a, which asked about the impact of policies on sexual harassment frequency, chi-square statistics were run between experienced VH and PH and the policy variable to test to what extent anti-sexual harassment policies impact levels of experienced sexual harassment. There was no significance for either VH (X2(8) = 8.83, p > .05) or PH (X2(8) = 9.59, p > .05). This indicates that the presence of an anti-sexual harassment policy did not act as a deterrent for experienced sexual harassment.

To answer RQ2b, which asked how policies impact the correction of sexual harassment, two analyses were run. The first analysis looked at whether a policy impacted the rates of reporting. In total, only 30% of participants chose to report at least some of their experienced sexual harassment. A one-way ANOVA was run between the policy variable and the combined reporting variables. The analysis showed no significance, F(2, 314) = 0.55, p > .05. Once again, the presence of an anti-sexual harassment policy did not result in significant differences in reporting experienced sexual harassment.

When asked why participants who experienced sexual harassment didn’t report, 29% of surveyed participants stated they were afraid it would negatively impact their job, 24% said there was no reporting mechanisms or they didn’t know how to report, 18% said they didn’t think they had evidence or would be believed, 10% were afraid of losing their job, 7.1% didn’t think it was a big deal, and 6.6% were afraid the accused would retaliate.

The second analysis measured if an anti-sexual harassment policy impacted the level of action taken by the organization. Of the 30% of participants who reported at least some of their experiences, action was taken at least some of the time by the organization at a rate of 42%. A one-way ANOVA was run between the policy variable and the combined action variables. The one-way ANOVA showed significance, F(2, 80) = 5.50, p < .01. Examining the Bonferroni post hoc comparisons showed that those who reported being trained had significantly higher levels of action (M = 1.88, SD = 1.12) than those who reported no policy (M = 0.72, SD = 0.95). There was no significance between those who had not received training but had a policy (M = 1.08, SD = 1.15) and the other options.

Participants were asked to indicate all the ways their organization responded when they reported their experienced sexual harassment (participants could pick more than one option). The most common response was to warn the accused at 41.6%. In 10% of reports, the case was dismissed without further action. The accused was fired in 4.3% of cases and suspended in 7.1% of cases. The police were informed 5.6% of the time. The person reporting was offered professional or emotional support at a rate of 13% and training for staff occurred for 9.6% of cases.

Discussion

This study examined the role of anti-sexual harassment policies in the prevention and correction of workplace sexual harassment. Based on a survey of news personnel and an analysis of anti-sexual harassment policies, we identified how current policies fail to follow best practice guidelines, prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, and have little impact on reporting. This furthers current literature that states workplace sexual harassment is common (Adams et al., 2020; Kearl et al., 2019; International Women’s Media Foundation, 2013; authors) by analyzing the connections between anti-sexual harassment policies and the lived experience. Our results support previous findings that the adoption of a policy without following best practices is not enough to enact change (Joubert et al., 2011).

Whilst sexual harassment occurs in many workplaces, this study focused on the news industry, which is particularly prone to sexual harassment (International Women’s Media Foundation, 2013; North, 2016; authors) and sexism (McCarthy & Glozer, 2021). We also limited our sample to major media houses in Sub-Sahara Africa that have similar characteristics of being large organizations with established power hierarchies and the infrastructure to implement policies if motivated. As a result of the focused sampling, patterns across countries were fairly consistent. There were a few significant differences such as Malawi and Rwanda having significantly lower levels for the 5 + category for VH, and Kenya having significantly higher levels for the 5 + category for VH. The only significant difference for PH was Malawi reporting less for the 5 + category. Botswana, Tanzania, and Zambia had fewer polices than the remaining countries. Moreover, there was no significance found for reporting and organizational action between countries.

The first major contribution of this study is the in-depth literature review on anti-sexual harassment policymaking (Alexander et al., 2005; Bell et al., 2002; Dekker & Barling, 1998; Foster & Fullager, 2018; Fusilier & Penrod, 2015; Gouws & Kritzinger, 2007; Gruber & Smith, 1995; Jacobson & Eaton, 2018; McCann, 2005; Pryor et al., 1993; Wilken & Badenhorst, 2003) that organized best practice guidelines into five categories. The categories aim to prevent sexual harassment (defining sexual harassment, communication, and monitoring) and correct it when it occurs (reporting mechanisms and complaint processing). The policy analysis showed gaps in the sampled policies that reflect current patriarchal norms rather than challenge them. Crucially, policies are reinforcing the status quo by not including monitoring or auditing (Williamson et al., 2020). For example, the sampled policies didn’t state intentions to follow-up on concluded cases of sexual harassment. These omissions ultimately undermine the success of anti-harassment policies because any weaknesses, gaps and emerging issues will remain unaddressed.

Furthermore, policies didn’t center on victims of sexual harassment. They overlooked safeguarding provisions, clear reporting channels, and necessary communication to combat current problematic cultural norms. Instead, many of the policies endorsed sexual harassment myths that doubt and blame victims (Exposito et al., 2014; Hardt et al., 2022; Kara & Toygar, 2019; Lonsway et al., 2008). The findings support previous research from the sampled countries that show deeply rooted cultural norms that normalize sexual harassment and violence (Bowman & Brundige, 2013; Chireshe & Chireshe, 2009; Duma et al., 2016; Kampyongo et al., 2017; Kebirungi, 2021; Links, 2012; Machisa & van Dorp, 2012; Muasya, 2014; Namuggala & Oosterom, 2023; Newman et al., 2011; 2021; Nyaga, 2020; Wangusi et al., 2018; Wamoyi et al., 2022).

The second major contribution of this study shows the impact of policies on workplace sexual harassment. The survey analysis found that policies didn’t decrease the likelihood of being sexually harassed. What’s more, only a minority of experienced sexual harassment was reported, and the presence of a policy didn’t impact the likelihood of reporting. Like the gaps in the policies, the reasons behind not reporting also point to cultural norms in that participants feared retaliation, not being believed, and potential negative impacts on their job. These are all common outcomes of sexual harassment myth acceptance in the workplace (Lonsway et al., 2008). Furthermore, Hershcovis et al. (2021) theorize that the forces in organizations such as power structures and cultural belief systems lead to silencing victims to not come forward and dismissing those who do. A similar pattern was found in this study.

Another indicator of patriarchal forces at play was the impact of gender on the likelihood of experiencing sexual harassment. Women in our study were 2.5 times more likely to be sexually harassed than men and over four times more likely to be sexually harassed five or more times. The most common scenario in this study was a man sexually harassing a woman (which is statistically the most common scenario globally, UN Women, n.d.). However, it is noteworthy that 12.5% of women identified a woman as the perpetrator, and 48% of men identified a man as the perpetrator (7% of women and 16.7% of men opted not to identify the gender of their perpetrator). Overall, the power structures in the sampled newsrooms support male dominated workplaces and consequently lead to women being the primary targets of sexual harassment, though anyone can be sexually harassed.

The silencing of victims is also reaffirmed by organizations’ failure to act. Organizations responded to less than half of the surveyed participants’ reported claims. The most common action was to warn the accused only. It isn’t worth the potential backlash to report if there is little done by the organization. Consequently, the cycle of sexual harassment and silencing its victims continues with little likelihood of consequences to the accused.

In this context, there is also little communication via training on the issue. Only 16.4% of participants stated they were aware of a policy and had received training on it. Notably, those who indicated their organization had trained employees on their policy had a significantly higher chance of the organization acting than those with no policy. This implies the potential of training for the success of policies. Increased workplace discussion will also help to de-stigmatize the topic and signal to stakeholders it’s an important issue to organizations.

As the findings of the policy analysis and survey illustrate, workplace training should consider the importance of macro-level socio-cultural influences (McCarthy & Moon, 2018) since the rationale is strong for anti-sexual harassment policies while still not producing successful outcomes. Few people openly support sexual harassment; yet the policies displayed cultural attitudes that lead to paying lip service to the abhorrence of sexual harassment while avoiding necessary steps to eliminating it, which may disrupt current organizational and societal patriarchal power structures (Berdahl & Bhattacharyya, 2021; Fraser, 2015; Johnson & Johnson, 2017; Sadler et al., 2018; Tinkler & Zhao, 2020). We agree with Popovich and Warren (2010) that workplace sexual harassment is a symptom of power abuse within organizations that needs to be addressed before sexual harassment can be eliminated. We contribute to scholarship on sexual harassment within organizations (Hanney, 2016; Koliska & Eckert, 2015), by showing how gaps between policy and practice allow organizations to ignore systemic workplace sexual harassment.

Limitations and Future Research

Collection of this type of data has many challenges as it remains a sensitive topic and accessing policies can be difficult. Future research should continue to expand to other regions and types of media organizations. The limitations of this study include a small sample of gender non-conforming people. To better assess this population, researchers would need a more targeted approach such as snowballing. Future research should also include more attention to LGBTQIA + identities and ethnicity to understand intersecting characteristics of participants. Future research could also focus on case studies to explore any nuanced differences between news organizations within a country or region.

Conclusion

Despite data collected over the past decade showing sexual harassment is a problem in Sub-Saharan African newsrooms (International Women’s Media Foundation, 2013; authors), news organizations aren’t implementing effective policies that ensure zero-tolerance work environments. Moreover, the gender essentialism underpinning various gender inequalities like sexual harassment (Berdahl & Bhattacharyya, 2021) carry over into anti-sexual harassment policymaking, which results in protecting the organization and perpetrators rather than the victims of sexual harassment. Not surprisingly, news organizations with policies have little impact on the level of experienced sexual harassment or the likelihood of reporting. The exception is that having a policy and training did increase the likelihood of organizational action. The gap between lived experiences and perceptions must be closed through implementing robust anti-sexual harassment policies with clear definitions, multiple reliable reporting channels, due process when complaints are made, organizational communication that includes survivor informed training, and consistent monitoring.