Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Escaping the Scapegoat Trap: Using René Girard’s Framework for Workplace Bullying

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims at developing a theoretical model for workplace bullying using René Girard’s scapegoating framework. Despite the wide range of labels and related constructs present in workplace bullying literature, the explanation of the phenomenon is often studied under theoretical frameworks that do not always capture the nature of the concept. Indeed, the need to find instruments and tools to reduce or solve workplace bullying overshadowed conceptual and theoretical matters, leaving the concept undertheorized. By broadening the spectrum of social sciences beyond managerial and organizational studies, we propose to use René Girard’s scapegoating framework to shed new light on workplace bullying. The scapegoating framework allows us to understand better some collective and social dimensions of workplace bullying, catching relevant elements that characterize this phenomenon, also those that are less evident from organizational studies. In a Girardian sense, scapegoating is like a trap that every human society falls into, and many aspects of workplace bullying recall its mechanism. For Girard, a human group or society can fall into a spiral of reciprocal violence because of the mimetic desire mechanism, risking a conflict escalation: violence begets more violence, putting at risk the stability or even the existence of this group or society. Scapegoating is a way to overcome reciprocal violence by uniting against a single victim who cannot reciprocate this violence. This study also proposes a tentative way to escape this trap: positive mimesis and gift-giving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, R. (1996). The goodness of mimetic desire. In J. G. Williams (Ed.), The Girard reader (pp. 62–68). New York: Crossroad.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, R. (2000). Loving mimesis and Girard’s ‘scapegoat of the text’: A creative reassessment of mimetic desire. In W. M. Swartley (Ed.), Violence renounced: René Girard, biblical studies, and peacemaking (pp. 277–307). Pandora Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, A. (2018). The relationship among job characteristics organizational commitment and employee turnover intentions: A reciprocation perspective. Journal of Work-Applied Management, 10(1), 74–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, J. J., Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2018). The general aggression model. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 75–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anspach, M. (2002). A charge de revanche. Figures élémentaires de la réciprocité. Editions du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anspach, M. (2017). Vengeance in reverse. The tangled loops of violence, myth, and madness. East Lansing (MI): Michigan State University Press

  • Baillien, E., Camps, J., Van den Broeck, A., Stouten, J., Godderis, L., Sercu, M., & De Witte, H. (2016). An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind: Conflict escalation into workplace bullying and the role of distributive conflict behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(2), 415–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baillien, E., Escartín, J., Gross, C., & Zapf, D. (2017). Towards a conceptual and empirical differentiation between workplace bullying and interpersonal conflict. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(6), 870–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baillien, E., Griep, Y., Vander Elst, T., & De Witte, H. (2019). The relationship between organisational change and being a perpetrator of workplace bullying: A three-wave longitudinal study. Work & Stress, 33(3), 211–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, J. E., & Bartlett, M. E. (2011). Workplace bullying: An integrative literature review. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13(1), 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W., & Coon, G. S. (1993). Gift giving as agapic love: An alternative to the exchange paradigm based on dating experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 393–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergin, J., & Westwood, R. (2003). The necessities of violence. Culture and Organization, 9(4), 211–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boeker, W. (1992). Power and managerial dismissal: Scapegoating at the top. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 400–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonazzi, G. (1983). Scapegoating in complex organizations: The results of a comparative study of symbolic blame-giving in Italian and French public administration. Organization Studies, 4(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branch, S., Ramsay, S., & Barker, M. (2013). Workplace bullying, mobbing and general harassment: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(3), 280–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. P. (2015). The role of job embeddedness in the relationship between bullying and aggression. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(4), 518–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caillé, A. (1998). Le tiers paradigme. Anthropologie philosophique du don. Editions La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caillé, A. (2020). The negative gift: The sketch of a grammar of violence and evil. Revue Du MAUSS, 25(1), 227–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caponecchia, C., Branch, S., & Murray, J. P. (2020). Development of a taxonomy of workplace bullying intervention types: Informing research directions and supporting organizational decision making. Group & Organization Management, 45(1), 103–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chanial, P. (2020). “Reciprocity is evil”: Girard, Mauss, the gift, and love. Revue Du MAUSS, 25(1), 199–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costas, J., & Grey, C. (2019). Violence and organization studies. Organization Studies, 40(10), 1573–1586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, J., & Kavanagh, D. (2003). Organization as containment of acquisitive mimetic rivalry: The contribution of René Girard. Culture and Organization, 9(4), 239–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djabi, M., & de Longueval, O. S. (2020). Scapegoating in the organization: Which regulation modes? M@n@gement, 23(2), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, J., Miller, N. E., Doob, L. W., Mowrer, O. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression. Yale University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M. F., Dormann, C., Tuckey, M. R., & Escartín, J. (2017). Psychosocial safety climate (PSC) and enacted PSC for workplace bullying and psychological health problem reduction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(6), 844–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagle, J., & Newton, P. M. (1981). Scapegoating in small groups: An organizational approach. Human Relations, 34(4), 283–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S. (1999). The nature and causes of bullying at work. International Journal of Manpower, 20(1/2), 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., & Notelaers, G. (2009). Measuring exposure to bullying and harassment at work: Validity, factor structure and psychometric properties of the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised. Work & Stress, 23(1), 24–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, K., Salin, D., Einarsen, S. V., Skogstad, A., & Mykletun, R. J. (2019). Antecedents of ethical infrastructures against workplace bullying: The role of organizational size, perceived financial resources and level of high-quality HRM practices. Personnel Review, 48(3), 672–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsen, S., Skogstad, A., Rørvik, E., Lande, Å. B., & Nielsen, M. B. (2018). Climate for conflict management, exposure to workplace bullying and work engagement: A moderated mediation analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(3), 549–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faldetta, G. (2011). The logic of gift and gratuitousness in business relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(S1), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamson, W. A., & Scotch, N. A. (1964). Scapegoating in baseball. American Journal of Sociology, 70(1), 69–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gervasi, D., Faldetta, G., Pellegrini, M. M., & Maley, J. (2022). Reciprocity in organizational behavior studies: A systematic literature review of contents, types, and directions. European Management Journal., 40(3), 441–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girard, R. (1972). Violence and the sacred. Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girard, R. (1982). The scapegoat. Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girard, R. (1987a). Job. The victim of his people. Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Girard, R. (1987b). Things hidden since the foundation of the world. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girard, R. (2010). Battling to the end: Conversations with Benoît Chantre. Michigan State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glambek, M., Skogstad, A., & Einarsen, S. V. (2020). Does the number of perpetrators matter? An extension and re-analysis of workplace bullying as a risk factor for exclusion from working life. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 30(5), 508–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greco, L. M., Whitson, J. A., O’Boyle, E. H., Wang, C. S., & Kim, J. (2019). An eye for an eye? A meta-analysis of negative reciprocity in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(9), 1117–1143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, H., & Salin, D. (2003). Organisational antecedents of workplace bullying. In S. Einasrsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace (pp. 203–218). Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keashly, L., & Nowell, B. L. (2003). Conflict, conflict resolution and bullying. In S. Einasrsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace (pp. 339–358). London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, D., & Watson, J. J. (2001). A guide map to the terrain of gift value. PSychology and Marketing, 18(8), 809–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liefooghe, A. P. D., & Mac Davey, K. (2001). Accounts of workplace bullying: The role of the organization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 375–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, J. D., Brees, J. R., McAllister, C. P., Zorn, M. L., Martinko, M. J., & Harvey, P. (2018). Victim and culprit? The effects of entitlement and felt accountability on perceptions of abusive supervision and perpetration of workplace bullying. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(3), 659–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus-Newhall, A., Pedersen, W. C., Carlson, M., & Miller, N. (2000). Displaced aggression is alive and well: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(4), 670–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marion, J. L. (2020). Violence and forgiveness: From one mimesis to another. Continental Philosophy Review, 53(3), 385–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2010). Bullying in the workplace: Definition, prevalence, antecedents and consequences. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 13(2), 202–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mauss, M. (1950). Sociologie et anthropologie. Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parzefall, M.-R., & Salin, D. M. (2010). Perceptions of and reactions to workplace bullying: A social exchange perspective. Human Relations, 63(6), 761–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pheko, M. M., Monteiro, N. M., & Segopolo, M. T. (2017). When work hurts: A conceptual framework explaining how organizational culture may perpetuate workplace bullying. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 27(6), 571–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilch, I., & Turska, E. (2015). Relationships between machiavellianism, organizational culture, and workplace bullying: Emotional abuse from the target’s and the perpetrator’s perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1), 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, J. L., Brotheridge, C. M., Blenkinsopp, J., Bowes-Sperry, L., Bozionelos, N., Buzády, Z., Chuang, A., Drnevich, D., Garzon-Vico, A., & Leighton, C. (2013). Acceptability of workplace bullying: A comparative study on six continents. Journal of Business Research, 66(3), 374–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raver, J. L. (2013). Counterproductive work behavior and conflict: Merging complementary domains. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 6(3), 151–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. (2005). The Course of Recognition. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salin, D. (2003). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56(10), 1213–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinmair-Pösel, P. (2007). Original sin, grace, and positive mimesis. Contagion Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture., 14(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thylefors, I. (1987). Syndabockar: Om utstötning och mobbning i arbetslivet. Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomei, G., Di Pastena, C., Sinibaldi, F., Scala, B., Caciari, T., Rosati, M. V., Nieto, H. A., Capozzella, A., De Sio, S., Andreozzi, G., Cetica, C., Corbosiero, P., Monti, C., Marchione, S., Ciarrocca, M., Tomei, F., & Sancini, A. (2012). The dynamic of “scapegoating”: Mobbing, bullying and casting out. Prevention & Research, 1(2), 49–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18(1), 1–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Workplace Bullying Institute. (2021). Workplace bullying survey: The complete report. Retrieved from https://workplacebullying.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/2021-Full-Report.pdf

  • Wright, S. (2020). Hierarchies and bullying: An examination into the drivers for workplace harassment within organisation. Transnational Corporations Review, 12(2), 162–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapf, D., & Gross, C. (2001). Conflict escalation and coping with workplace bullying: A replication and extension. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 497–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zollo, L., Faldetta, G., Pellegrini, M. M., & Ciappei, C. (2022). “Eyes for eyes, teeth for teeth”: Positive and negative reciprocity in NPOs. Management Decision., 60(6), 1626–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Law, Kore University of Enna, Cittadella Universitaria, 94100, Enna, Italy

    Guglielmo Faldetta & Deborah Gervasi

Authors
  1. Guglielmo Faldetta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Deborah Gervasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guglielmo Faldetta.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research Involving Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Faldetta, G., Gervasi, D. Escaping the Scapegoat Trap: Using René Girard’s Framework for Workplace Bullying. J Bus Ethics 191, 269–283 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05488-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05488-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation